VOC
Sr. Member
Excellent news, very good ship for the job.
Let’s hope it is yet another successful recovery operation.
Let’s hope it is yet another successful recovery operation.
Odyssey Marine Article...
- Thread starter jeff k
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #1,922
'Blunder' lets looters pounce on HMS Victory
Jack Grimston Published: 3 June 2012
ANTIQUE cannons worth hundreds of thousands of pounds have been plundered from one of Britain’s most historic shipwrecks after a bungle by English Heritage betrayed its location, the company planning to raise the remains has claimed.
Odyssey Marine Exploration, the Florida firm that discovered the wreck of HMS Victory, predecessor to Admiral Nelson’s flagship, says at least two and possibly as many as six bronze guns have been illicitly removed from the site.
It blames English Heritage for publishing the approximate co-ordinates of the wreck, enabling looters to target it.
In a study published today Odyssey argues that the Victory, which may contain gold worth hundreds of millions of pounds as well as more than 100 bronze cannons, has been severely damaged by fishing boats as well as unauthorised salvage operations and must be recovered urgently. Odyssey located the Victory, which sank in 1744 in a storm, four years ago. It lies in 240ft of water west of the Channel Islands.
The Odyssey report was co-written by Sean Kingsley, a marine archeologist and director of the consultancy Wreck Watch. He says: “Through the publication of the general co-ordinates of the Victory’s location in a desk-based assessment commissioned by English Heritage on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, fishermen and illicit salvors have been able to pinpoint the site.”
English Heritage denied it had given away the location. “The co-ordinates [given] are the reported location of the wreck provided by Odyssey and were in the public domain at the time,” it said. “The report did not confirm or deny that information. The precise position of the wreck has never been published, and great care was given to keep that information in strictest confidence.”
Kingsley says an underwater survey of the wreck site by Odyssey has revealed severe damage caused by trawlers, which have dragged some of the cannons across the seabed and scraped away the surfaces of others. Timbers have also been destroyed.
One of the cannons was stolen by a Dutch salvage boat, which lowered a grabbing claw to the sea floor. Further damage was caused when French customs officers looking for drugs tore out an original wooden plug and powder charge.
The gun is now believed to be in the vaults of a Dutch museum, while the Ministry of Defence negotiates its return. Other cannons are rumoured to be in France.
This year the MoD handed over the Victory to the Maritime Heritage Foundation, set up by Lord Lingfield, a Conservative peer and relative of Sir John Balchin, the admiral who was among the 1,150 sailors drowned when the ship sank.
The archeologist Margaret Rule, who masterminded the raising of the Mary Rose in 1982, is patron of the foundation that has signed a contract with Odyssey to excavate the Victory. The operation is expected to cost about ÂŁ20m.
Lingfield has been seeking approval from the government to begin work as quickly as possible, but work has been delayed by fierce criticism from the archeological world of the decision to hand over the Victory and let many of its treasures fall into the hands of a private company.
Lingfield said: “With the disappearance of the latest extremely valuable artefact, a rare 28-pounder bronze cannon, ministers are faced with an urgent decision.
“Those who believe this highly important wreck, if it is left exactly as it is, will not be prey to unscrupulous people stealing valuable artefacts are entirely deluded.”
The Maritime Heritage Foundation hopes to hold an exhibition of the items recovered at Chatham royal dockyard in Kent.
They are likely to include a golden compass bought by the admiralty for the ship and a rare quadrant used by a scientist on board. It is expected that any human remains found in the wreck will be interred in a concrete vault beneath the sea bed.
However, Lord Renfrew, former professor of archeology at Cambridge University, said this weekend: “The government should not be handing over wrecks to newly established heritage organisations that have no track record. I think the government is acting in a very careless way.”
He added: “To sell off artefacts would be outrageous. The government and the navy seem to be sleepwalking. When objects from HMS Victory appear on the open market, all hell should be let loose.”
English Heritage opposes selling off artefacts. Odyssey argues that it will carry out a professional excavation at no cost to the taxpayer and that it is better to sell off some guns, many of which are duplicates, than to leave the whole wreck on the sea bed indefinitely, where it will be vulnerable to further damage. The company will also claim the coins and precious metals it believes are buried beneath the sea bed.
Greg Stemm, founder and chairman of Odyssey, said: “If the site is left as it is, these items and the stories they can tell will be lost for ever.
“There are tens of thousands of important shipwrecks around the UK that are being trawled to death and lost to nature. On this shipwreck, a model has been proposed that will see great archeological resources utilised to bring it back to life at no cost to taxpayers. Shouldn’t we allow that model to play out and see how it works?”
An MoD spokesman said no decision had been taken on whether to go ahead with the excavation.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1052308.ece
Jack Grimston Published: 3 June 2012
ANTIQUE cannons worth hundreds of thousands of pounds have been plundered from one of Britain’s most historic shipwrecks after a bungle by English Heritage betrayed its location, the company planning to raise the remains has claimed.
Odyssey Marine Exploration, the Florida firm that discovered the wreck of HMS Victory, predecessor to Admiral Nelson’s flagship, says at least two and possibly as many as six bronze guns have been illicitly removed from the site.
It blames English Heritage for publishing the approximate co-ordinates of the wreck, enabling looters to target it.
In a study published today Odyssey argues that the Victory, which may contain gold worth hundreds of millions of pounds as well as more than 100 bronze cannons, has been severely damaged by fishing boats as well as unauthorised salvage operations and must be recovered urgently. Odyssey located the Victory, which sank in 1744 in a storm, four years ago. It lies in 240ft of water west of the Channel Islands.
The Odyssey report was co-written by Sean Kingsley, a marine archeologist and director of the consultancy Wreck Watch. He says: “Through the publication of the general co-ordinates of the Victory’s location in a desk-based assessment commissioned by English Heritage on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, fishermen and illicit salvors have been able to pinpoint the site.”
English Heritage denied it had given away the location. “The co-ordinates [given] are the reported location of the wreck provided by Odyssey and were in the public domain at the time,” it said. “The report did not confirm or deny that information. The precise position of the wreck has never been published, and great care was given to keep that information in strictest confidence.”
Kingsley says an underwater survey of the wreck site by Odyssey has revealed severe damage caused by trawlers, which have dragged some of the cannons across the seabed and scraped away the surfaces of others. Timbers have also been destroyed.
One of the cannons was stolen by a Dutch salvage boat, which lowered a grabbing claw to the sea floor. Further damage was caused when French customs officers looking for drugs tore out an original wooden plug and powder charge.
The gun is now believed to be in the vaults of a Dutch museum, while the Ministry of Defence negotiates its return. Other cannons are rumoured to be in France.
This year the MoD handed over the Victory to the Maritime Heritage Foundation, set up by Lord Lingfield, a Conservative peer and relative of Sir John Balchin, the admiral who was among the 1,150 sailors drowned when the ship sank.
The archeologist Margaret Rule, who masterminded the raising of the Mary Rose in 1982, is patron of the foundation that has signed a contract with Odyssey to excavate the Victory. The operation is expected to cost about ÂŁ20m.
Lingfield has been seeking approval from the government to begin work as quickly as possible, but work has been delayed by fierce criticism from the archeological world of the decision to hand over the Victory and let many of its treasures fall into the hands of a private company.
Lingfield said: “With the disappearance of the latest extremely valuable artefact, a rare 28-pounder bronze cannon, ministers are faced with an urgent decision.
“Those who believe this highly important wreck, if it is left exactly as it is, will not be prey to unscrupulous people stealing valuable artefacts are entirely deluded.”
The Maritime Heritage Foundation hopes to hold an exhibition of the items recovered at Chatham royal dockyard in Kent.
They are likely to include a golden compass bought by the admiralty for the ship and a rare quadrant used by a scientist on board. It is expected that any human remains found in the wreck will be interred in a concrete vault beneath the sea bed.
However, Lord Renfrew, former professor of archeology at Cambridge University, said this weekend: “The government should not be handing over wrecks to newly established heritage organisations that have no track record. I think the government is acting in a very careless way.”
He added: “To sell off artefacts would be outrageous. The government and the navy seem to be sleepwalking. When objects from HMS Victory appear on the open market, all hell should be let loose.”
English Heritage opposes selling off artefacts. Odyssey argues that it will carry out a professional excavation at no cost to the taxpayer and that it is better to sell off some guns, many of which are duplicates, than to leave the whole wreck on the sea bed indefinitely, where it will be vulnerable to further damage. The company will also claim the coins and precious metals it believes are buried beneath the sea bed.
Greg Stemm, founder and chairman of Odyssey, said: “If the site is left as it is, these items and the stories they can tell will be lost for ever.
“There are tens of thousands of important shipwrecks around the UK that are being trawled to death and lost to nature. On this shipwreck, a model has been proposed that will see great archeological resources utilised to bring it back to life at no cost to taxpayers. Shouldn’t we allow that model to play out and see how it works?”
An MoD spokesman said no decision had been taken on whether to go ahead with the excavation.
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1052308.ece
Last edited:
VOC
Sr. Member
In-situ preservation at its best.
EH and UNESCO would both rather let all wrecks be destroyed by nature, looters and fishermen than let one be excavated and recorded by a commercial archaeological operation funded by the sale of duplicates.
If Odyssey don't get to excavate it, I hope it all gets raised by the black market salvors, just to to show the purist the stupidity of their misguided approach to our underwater cultural heritage.
EH and UNESCO would both rather let all wrecks be destroyed by nature, looters and fishermen than let one be excavated and recorded by a commercial archaeological operation funded by the sale of duplicates.
If Odyssey don't get to excavate it, I hope it all gets raised by the black market salvors, just to to show the purist the stupidity of their misguided approach to our underwater cultural heritage.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #1,924
Sean A. Kingsley, Neil Cunningham Dobson, Frederick Van de Walle, Balchin's Victory (Site 25C): Shipwreck Monitoring & Cannon Impacts (2012)
http://shipwreck.net/pdf/OMEPapers24-FINALHIGH.pdf
http://shipwreck.net/pdf/OMEPapers24-FINALHIGH.pdf
- Thread starter
- #1,925
So where does that lead us?
In reading through the Deed of Trust and the Agreement, there is certainly a disconnect. The MoD, deeded Balchins Victory over to the Foundation, with agreement that they maintain control and approval to recover the site.
Breaking that down, it is simple to see how even the basic foundation of this transaction is fraught with disaster. The wreck is not located in Sovereign British waters. In turning ownership over to a private entity, the Government releases sovereign rights, and leaves the artefacts for the Foundation to enforce its rights in International Waters.
Policing the site, and what to do on an encounter on the site with another vessel? Really, if you were out in international waters, and another private vessel pulled up, and said "We are the Salvor in Possession of that" and waves around the Victory agreement with the Foundation, what would you do?
The agreement states that the recovery must conform to the archaeological principles set out in Annex A to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. Annex a forbids the sale of artefacts, and while there is potential for distribution, it MUST not be irretrievable.
In Parliament, the issue was brought up just recently, on the 22nd of May,
"Lord Astor of Hever: Under the deed of gift which transferred the remains of HMS "Victory" (1744) to the Maritime Heritage Foundation, the foundation requires the prior agreement of the Secretary of State for Defence should it wish to take actions in respect of the wreck. The deed also identifies the responsibilities of an advisory group, consisting of representatives of the National Museum of the Royal Navy and English Heritage, in providing advice to both the Secretary of State and the foundation on the extent to which any actions proposed by the foundation are consistent with the archaeological principles set out in Annex A to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. The text of the deed of gift and the terms of reference of the advisory group are available to view on the MoD website. Deed of Trust
This arrangement provides HMG with effective control of activities on the site. We believe that the safeguards in place are sufficient to ensure that any actions taken by the foundation or those with whom it contracts in respect of the wreck will be consistent with the principles in Annex A to the UNESCO Convention."
Annex A, #2
(b) the deposition of underwater cultural heritage, recovered in the course of a research project in conformity with this Convention, provided such deposition does not prejudice the scientific or cultural interest or integrity of the recovered material or result in its irretrievable dispersal;
Interesting sequence of events. When the Opposition to the recovery and sale of artefacts by Odyssey became evident, "suddenly" the site is under vicious attack by looters , fisherman, and Mother Nature, and must be salvaged and sold immediately.
Of course, records will be kept of the sale of each artefact, and that somehow does not violate the provisions of "irretrievable dispersal"
I know if I buy a coin or artefact from the Odyssey Store, I dont expect them to come and say I have to give it back, would you?
Hell, I would sell it back, and knowing they would have to, it would have a bit of a premium, like 1000X. What are they going to do? They have the onus of the provision, not the buyer.
Then again, according to a posy by VOC,
Odyssey only sells duplicates of the artefacts, correct VOC? Then all is well.
In reading through the Deed of Trust and the Agreement, there is certainly a disconnect. The MoD, deeded Balchins Victory over to the Foundation, with agreement that they maintain control and approval to recover the site.
Breaking that down, it is simple to see how even the basic foundation of this transaction is fraught with disaster. The wreck is not located in Sovereign British waters. In turning ownership over to a private entity, the Government releases sovereign rights, and leaves the artefacts for the Foundation to enforce its rights in International Waters.
Policing the site, and what to do on an encounter on the site with another vessel? Really, if you were out in international waters, and another private vessel pulled up, and said "We are the Salvor in Possession of that" and waves around the Victory agreement with the Foundation, what would you do?
The agreement states that the recovery must conform to the archaeological principles set out in Annex A to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. Annex a forbids the sale of artefacts, and while there is potential for distribution, it MUST not be irretrievable.
In Parliament, the issue was brought up just recently, on the 22nd of May,
"Lord Astor of Hever: Under the deed of gift which transferred the remains of HMS "Victory" (1744) to the Maritime Heritage Foundation, the foundation requires the prior agreement of the Secretary of State for Defence should it wish to take actions in respect of the wreck. The deed also identifies the responsibilities of an advisory group, consisting of representatives of the National Museum of the Royal Navy and English Heritage, in providing advice to both the Secretary of State and the foundation on the extent to which any actions proposed by the foundation are consistent with the archaeological principles set out in Annex A to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. The text of the deed of gift and the terms of reference of the advisory group are available to view on the MoD website. Deed of Trust
This arrangement provides HMG with effective control of activities on the site. We believe that the safeguards in place are sufficient to ensure that any actions taken by the foundation or those with whom it contracts in respect of the wreck will be consistent with the principles in Annex A to the UNESCO Convention."
Annex A, #2
(b) the deposition of underwater cultural heritage, recovered in the course of a research project in conformity with this Convention, provided such deposition does not prejudice the scientific or cultural interest or integrity of the recovered material or result in its irretrievable dispersal;
Interesting sequence of events. When the Opposition to the recovery and sale of artefacts by Odyssey became evident, "suddenly" the site is under vicious attack by looters , fisherman, and Mother Nature, and must be salvaged and sold immediately.
Of course, records will be kept of the sale of each artefact, and that somehow does not violate the provisions of "irretrievable dispersal"
I know if I buy a coin or artefact from the Odyssey Store, I dont expect them to come and say I have to give it back, would you?
Hell, I would sell it back, and knowing they would have to, it would have a bit of a premium, like 1000X. What are they going to do? They have the onus of the provision, not the buyer.
Then again, according to a posy by VOC,
Odyssey only sells duplicates of the artefacts, correct VOC? Then all is well.
Last edited:
VOC
Sr. Member
"Interesting sequence of events. When the Opposition to the recovery and sale of artefacts by Odyssey became evident, "suddenly" the site is under vicious attack by looters , fisherman, and Mother Nature, and must be salvaged and sold immediately"
AUVnav
1. Looters have actually been caught salvaging a gun
2. The trawl damage was recorded and published in the very first site reports
3. Mother Nature has destroyed best part of the site and is continuing to do so, that is why there is not a timber vessel sat there to record !
We live in a society where metal thieves prise plaques off war memorials and antiquity theft is huge, so once a wreck has been located you cannot hope to protect it at sea.
Fishermen will try and trawl up guns just for their scrap value let alone what they may get on the black market. (look what they did to the VOC wrecks in the Southern North Sea).
Many guns get removed and sold without anyone knowing, so Odyssey has now presented the Archaeological community with a real site management problem, what are they going to do about it ?
AUVnav
1. Looters have actually been caught salvaging a gun
2. The trawl damage was recorded and published in the very first site reports
3. Mother Nature has destroyed best part of the site and is continuing to do so, that is why there is not a timber vessel sat there to record !
We live in a society where metal thieves prise plaques off war memorials and antiquity theft is huge, so once a wreck has been located you cannot hope to protect it at sea.
Fishermen will try and trawl up guns just for their scrap value let alone what they may get on the black market. (look what they did to the VOC wrecks in the Southern North Sea).
Many guns get removed and sold without anyone knowing, so Odyssey has now presented the Archaeological community with a real site management problem, what are they going to do about it ?
Really, so for one to be a thief, one has to know it belongs to someone else, like knowing the site is the Victory, but recovering 2 cannon and turning them over to the RoW for payment?
You are missing the point. The site would have been protected as sovereign by the British Government, by the British Navy.
Instead, the decision was made to hand it over to a private entity.
Who is protecting it now? Odyssey?
What is protecting it now? The site belongs to a private entity, who now has to provide security, and in the event that someone does try to do anything, report the action. Report to who? International waters,?
"salvor in possession" of what, a geographical area in International waters?
The bottom of the channel is littered with wrecks on top of wrecks, go ahead, take me to Court. Which one will you use again? Good luck. Prove it belongs here, well then, pay me a recovery fee.
Again, if I was on a recovery, would I stop when any fool came up and said thats mine, you better show us the proof, or we stitch you at the waterline with the 50 cal.
As we can see right now, the Dutch team that recovered the cannon was no different than Odyssey. They recovered a cannon they found at a site in the English Channel. The British government is negotiating the recovery fee.
Last edited:
VOC
Sr. Member
At least Odyssey reported the find, consulted with the owners and obtained permission before recovering the guns that they did whilst being filmed.
The payment was pre-arranged for ownership purposes and a donation towards recovery cost, that as you know would mot have paid for more than a day on site.
The Dutch just stole their gun
Many of the UKs historical assets are passed into the private sector or trust for management, as the state could never have the resources to do it.
The National Trust is one example.
The payment was pre-arranged for ownership purposes and a donation towards recovery cost, that as you know would mot have paid for more than a day on site.
The Dutch just stole their gun
Many of the UKs historical assets are passed into the private sector or trust for management, as the state could never have the resources to do it.
The National Trust is one example.
- Thread starter
- #1,930
Don't be silly, nobody is going to ask for a coin back. They may ask the owner to make it available for research purposes. If a musem wants a particular artifact then let them purchase it. This works very well under the Treasure Trove Act.
Odyssey will be in compliance with UNESCO Annex A. You need to do a better job of reading it.
Rule 2. The commercial exploitation of underwater cultural heritage for trade or speculation or its irretrievable dispersal is fundamentally incompatible with the protection and proper management of underwater cultural heritage. Underwater cultural heritage shall not be traded, sold, bought or bartered as commercial goods.
This Rule cannot be interpreted as preventing:
(a) the provision of professional archaeological services or necessary services incidental thereto whose nature and purpose are in full conformity with this Convention and are subject to the authorization of the competent authorities;
(b) the deposition of underwater cultural heritage, recovered in the course of a research project in conformity with this Convention, provided such deposition does not prejudice the scientific or cultural interest or integrity of the recovered material or result in its irretrievable dispersal; is in accordance with the provisions of Rules 33 and 34; and is subject to the authorization of the competent authorities.
Rule 33. The project archives, including any underwater cultural heritage removed and a copy of all supporting documentation shall, as far as possible, be kept together and intact as a collection in a manner that is available for professional and public access as well as for the curation of the archives. This should be done as rapidly as possible and in any case not later than ten years from the completion of the project, in so far as may be compatible with conservation of the underwater cultural heritage.
Rule 34. The project archives shall be managed according to international professional standards, and subject to the authorization of the competent authorities.
I dont believe that is what happened, and if one looks at the timeline between when the cannon were recovered, the arrest was filed by Odyssey, and the announcement.
Aside from that, think about it.
You are a Dutch salvage team, searching the seafloor, you find a canon, and are taking it back to file an Admiralty Arrest for the site in the Dutch Court.
Thieves?
Was there an Arrest filed on the site? If so, where, and who would be notified? Open ocean, international waters.
Look at the arrest Odyssey filed on the site, in a Florida Court, with unknown coordinates and unknown identification.
If you were out there, what would you do?
Aside from that, think about it.
You are a Dutch salvage team, searching the seafloor, you find a canon, and are taking it back to file an Admiralty Arrest for the site in the Dutch Court.
Thieves?
Was there an Arrest filed on the site? If so, where, and who would be notified? Open ocean, international waters.
Look at the arrest Odyssey filed on the site, in a Florida Court, with unknown coordinates and unknown identification.
If you were out there, what would you do?
VOC
Sr. Member
AUVnav
You are correct that under the law the Dutch have probably not broken any rules, and it will be up to the prosecution to prove any intent to steal the property.
Any prosecution will probably hinge on whether the vessel sailed directly to the site and if they were making attempts to conceal the gun when boarded by the authorities rather than making any real attempt to report the find and file a claim.
Taking out the disputed ethics argument, the fact is that an very interesting wreck (that is being destroyed) is now known to lie at a publicised position on trawling grounds that is also in re-breather or open circuit mixed gas diving depths.
Neither the British government nor any other state funded Archaeological group have the extensive funds required to excavate and record the wreck.
We also know as fact that the site is being damaged and looted and will continue to be so.
So we have two realistic options:
1. Sit back on our moral high ground in the vain hope that one day funds will become available whilst information is being lost each year, just like we are doing with the Sterling Castle (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/discover/maritime/map/stirling-castle/) and Resurgam http://www.divernet.com/other_diving_topics/archaeology/160892/the_real_value_of_the_resurgam.html )
or :
2. Get off our high horse and let a willing contractor record all remaining information in a controlled and monitored fashion, allow the owners and museums to keep the important artefacts, and finance this at the contractors risk by the sale of less important finds.
Anyone on the outside who is not involved in the ethical argument will adopt option 2 every time.
The best protection this site will ever get is parking the Odyssey Explorer over the site on DP as no divers or trawlers will be going near it.
Unfortunately the British Navy has now not got enough ships to protect itself let alone a shipwreck on the bottom for the next 20 to 100 years before enough state funds may become available.
In relation to the Victory time line:
Wreck was located April 2008, pre-disturbance surveys June & Sept 2008, trial pit and gun recovery in cooperation with wreck owner (British Government - Ministry of Defence) October 2008, Conservation instigated October 2008, Salvage award September 2009
"Odyssey discovered the site nearly 100 km from where the ship was historically believed to have been wrecked on a reef near the Channel Islands. In an operation conducted in cooperation with the MOD, Odyssey has completed an archaeological pre-disturbance survey of the site, conducted limited test trenching, and recovered two bronze cannon to confirm the identity of the shipwreck. The cannon recovered include a 12-pounder featuring the royal arms of George II and a 4-ton, 42-pounder bearing the crest of George I. The huge 42-pounder recovered is the only known example of a gun of this type and size currently in existence on dry land. On September 18, 2009, Odyssey announced it reached an agreement with the UK Government on a salvage award for the cannon recovered from the site". (www.shipwreck.net)
AUVnav, It may be worth treating yourself to copies of the two excellent books "Oceans Odyssey" and "Oceans Odyssey 2" ( http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_1_10/181-8209743-2315858?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=oceans+odyssey&sprefix=oceans+ody%2Caps%2C849 ) , I am sure they will send them to you in unmarked plain paper wrapping if you are a bit worried what your neighbours will think
VOC
You are correct that under the law the Dutch have probably not broken any rules, and it will be up to the prosecution to prove any intent to steal the property.
Any prosecution will probably hinge on whether the vessel sailed directly to the site and if they were making attempts to conceal the gun when boarded by the authorities rather than making any real attempt to report the find and file a claim.
Taking out the disputed ethics argument, the fact is that an very interesting wreck (that is being destroyed) is now known to lie at a publicised position on trawling grounds that is also in re-breather or open circuit mixed gas diving depths.
Neither the British government nor any other state funded Archaeological group have the extensive funds required to excavate and record the wreck.
We also know as fact that the site is being damaged and looted and will continue to be so.
So we have two realistic options:
1. Sit back on our moral high ground in the vain hope that one day funds will become available whilst information is being lost each year, just like we are doing with the Sterling Castle (http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/discover/maritime/map/stirling-castle/) and Resurgam http://www.divernet.com/other_diving_topics/archaeology/160892/the_real_value_of_the_resurgam.html )
or :
2. Get off our high horse and let a willing contractor record all remaining information in a controlled and monitored fashion, allow the owners and museums to keep the important artefacts, and finance this at the contractors risk by the sale of less important finds.
Anyone on the outside who is not involved in the ethical argument will adopt option 2 every time.
The best protection this site will ever get is parking the Odyssey Explorer over the site on DP as no divers or trawlers will be going near it.
Unfortunately the British Navy has now not got enough ships to protect itself let alone a shipwreck on the bottom for the next 20 to 100 years before enough state funds may become available.
In relation to the Victory time line:
Wreck was located April 2008, pre-disturbance surveys June & Sept 2008, trial pit and gun recovery in cooperation with wreck owner (British Government - Ministry of Defence) October 2008, Conservation instigated October 2008, Salvage award September 2009
"Odyssey discovered the site nearly 100 km from where the ship was historically believed to have been wrecked on a reef near the Channel Islands. In an operation conducted in cooperation with the MOD, Odyssey has completed an archaeological pre-disturbance survey of the site, conducted limited test trenching, and recovered two bronze cannon to confirm the identity of the shipwreck. The cannon recovered include a 12-pounder featuring the royal arms of George II and a 4-ton, 42-pounder bearing the crest of George I. The huge 42-pounder recovered is the only known example of a gun of this type and size currently in existence on dry land. On September 18, 2009, Odyssey announced it reached an agreement with the UK Government on a salvage award for the cannon recovered from the site". (www.shipwreck.net)
AUVnav, It may be worth treating yourself to copies of the two excellent books "Oceans Odyssey" and "Oceans Odyssey 2" ( http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_1_10/181-8209743-2315858?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=oceans+odyssey&sprefix=oceans+ody%2Caps%2C849 ) , I am sure they will send them to you in unmarked plain paper wrapping if you are a bit worried what your neighbours will think
VOC
Last edited:
Guess you missed this article. ENGLISH HERITAGE CLEARED AS ODYSSEY CEO ADMITS PEOPLE TRACK US “ALL THE TIME”
Remember this from a previous post?
"Many in the maritime archaeology world believe that Odyssey is attempting to discredit English Heritage as the UK Government’s statutory adviser on maritime archaeology in advance of the final decision by Ministers over the excavation of the Victory and the fate of the artefacts she carries."
It is stated UK policy to observe the Annex as the foundation of the management of all historic wreck sites such as the Victory.
The UNESCO Annex forbids the breaking up of collections of material from wreck sites, and the sale of artefact’s for profit, or to cover costs.
The Annex is very clear on funding, an estimate is required of the costs, from recovery to conservation, and curation. That amount is to be set up as a bond, prior to project approval. There is no pay as you go scenario, and the UK govt wants to make sure that the entire wreck is recovered, conserved and displayed properly.
You cannot do that when you are selling off the artefacts to pay for costs.
If Odyssey would have waited, instead of spending weeks on the site creating photomosaics, or filming TV shows, everyone watching on AIS would never have known the location.
Just as with the Black Swan, the article in the Sunday Times claiming a blunder by English Heritage has backfired, just as has the faux state of emergency.
Remember this from a previous post?
"Many in the maritime archaeology world believe that Odyssey is attempting to discredit English Heritage as the UK Government’s statutory adviser on maritime archaeology in advance of the final decision by Ministers over the excavation of the Victory and the fate of the artefacts she carries."
It is stated UK policy to observe the Annex as the foundation of the management of all historic wreck sites such as the Victory.
The UNESCO Annex forbids the breaking up of collections of material from wreck sites, and the sale of artefact’s for profit, or to cover costs.
The Annex is very clear on funding, an estimate is required of the costs, from recovery to conservation, and curation. That amount is to be set up as a bond, prior to project approval. There is no pay as you go scenario, and the UK govt wants to make sure that the entire wreck is recovered, conserved and displayed properly.
You cannot do that when you are selling off the artefacts to pay for costs.
If Odyssey would have waited, instead of spending weeks on the site creating photomosaics, or filming TV shows, everyone watching on AIS would never have known the location.
Just as with the Black Swan, the article in the Sunday Times claiming a blunder by English Heritage has backfired, just as has the faux state of emergency.
VOC
Sr. Member
AUVnav
Heritage Daily ! now you have to be kidding
I only thought you read credible publications, how disappointing.
Sensationalising like "MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY COMMUNITY WAS "ROCKED" BY AN ACCUSATION PUBLISHED IN THE SUNDAY TIMES
Who in the archaeological community is so insecure as to be "Rocked" by anything published in the Sunday Times ?
VOC
Heritage Daily ! now you have to be kidding
I only thought you read credible publications, how disappointing.
Sensationalising like "MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY COMMUNITY WAS "ROCKED" BY AN ACCUSATION PUBLISHED IN THE SUNDAY TIMES
Who in the archaeological community is so insecure as to be "Rocked" by anything published in the Sunday Times ?
VOC
- Thread starter
- #1,935
The Dutch recovered the cannon in 2009, and Wessex published the following location in April 2010.
OME Site 25C lies within a circle with a radius of 5 nautical miles centred on the following position:
Lat. 49° 40.8’ N Long. 03° 47.9’ W
Since then, several more cannon have been recovered by fishing vessels. Odyssey has been claiming that the site was being damaged ever since they found the Victory in 2008.
OME Site 25C lies within a circle with a radius of 5 nautical miles centred on the following position:
Lat. 49° 40.8’ N Long. 03° 47.9’ W
Since then, several more cannon have been recovered by fishing vessels. Odyssey has been claiming that the site was being damaged ever since they found the Victory in 2008.
It is very easy for everyone to watch Odyssey at the site on AIS, or even visual from the fishing boats. Of course fishing boats will, and can recover the cannon, and what exactly is there to stop them? As was stated before, if they found a cannon, would Odyssey approach them, tell them what, and in reality, why should they believe them?
This is exactly why it needs to go back under the protection of the British Government.
The site could be designated as World Heritage by UNESCO, allowing a no fishing zone to be placed around the wreck.
British, French, Spanish, and other Naval Vessels in the area can keep watch and protect the site, as they are on constant patrol.
Good one VOC, that made me laugh.
This is exactly why it needs to go back under the protection of the British Government.
The site could be designated as World Heritage by UNESCO, allowing a no fishing zone to be placed around the wreck.
British, French, Spanish, and other Naval Vessels in the area can keep watch and protect the site, as they are on constant patrol.
Good one VOC, that made me laugh.
- Thread starter
- #1,937
You can laugh all you want, but there is no better published works available by any marine archaeologists. That's why some narrow-minded archaeologists are afraid of Odyssey. Odyssey does excellent deep sea archaeology, and they know it.
VOC
Sr. Member
jeff k said:
Hi Jeff
Having read hundreds of archaeological papers I totally agree with what you have said.
I doubt if AUVnav has actually read either of the books.
Odyssey has them all worried, and justly so. The state funded archaeological community have to try and discredit the likes of Odyssey as they fear for their jobs, they did the same with “A” vocational (amateur) archaeologist but lost that argument in the end. It is just like opposition parties in politics, no matter how good the Bill is for the population, the opposition has to try and discredit everything they say or do, just to stand any chance of re-election.
If any state funded archaeologist said how well Odyssey do it, they know that the guys holding the purse strings will start to say why are we paying you guys when these guys will do it at no cost to the state. (Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas).
We saw the same with the UK medical profession with everyone saying all health care must be done by the state with a “no profit motive”. Now the state pays health companies to carry out a lot of the work, with many patients preferring to go to private sector treatment centres as they know they can do it better.
The same will happen with underwater archaeology in the end, so the purist better get ready for the big change. (they should be careful who they slag off now, as they will be looking to send them a CV before to long).
It is interesting all the people attacking Odyssey and the Victory project still always skirt around the big question of who and when anybody would ever get around to recovering the trapped information contained within the site.
And as for UNESCO wanting a full costing and funds bonded up front for excavating, conserving, recording, publishing and display prior to excavating, this is only put in the convention to try and stop all future excavation.
They know it is an impossibility to cost the unknown. How does anybody know in advance what artefacts and of what materials or in what state might be found until you excavate, so you have to have a system where funds can be raised based on the findings on site.
Run the UNESCO requirement over any previous project, and you can see how impossible it is to comply with that clause. No project ever has been compleated properly within the budget initially planned. (plenty of state funded projects have been compromissed by lack of funds as they could not raise more cash like Odyssey or the Mary Rose Trust can).
VOC
Last edited:
VOC
Sr. Member
What a poor publication Heritage Daily has become ?
Stooping so low as to publish the trash claims and propaganda from the UK's JNAPC and its leader Robert Yorke
http://www.heritagedaily.com/2012/06/odyssey-victory-salvage-plan-hit-by-fresh-revelations/
Stooping so low as to publish the trash claims and propaganda from the UK's JNAPC and its leader Robert Yorke
http://www.heritagedaily.com/2012/06/odyssey-victory-salvage-plan-hit-by-fresh-revelations/
