rgecy
Bronze Member
Who, Who, Who, me?
Spain suing Odyssey...
- Thread starter GarrettDealer
- Start date
Who, Who, Who, me?
S
shipresearcher1
Guest
salvor 6 said:
That's not the wreck they bought off Marx. That wreck was simply named 'Dry Tortugas' because they could never find out what it was. The artifacts from that wreck were auctioned by Superior Galleries where the new Odyssey bought them from their own auction. The Mercedes you are talking about might be a completely different wreck than the one off of Spain. There are many wrecks with the same name. Thank you for your input.
diverlynn
Hero Member
Copperhead
Bronze Member
Okay, I'm probably wrong on this, but it's been bugging me....
I've looked at those pallets of (I assume 5 gallon) containers, and I'm thinking they were not filled up with coins (even though, IIRC, one was shown opened up and nearly filled to the brim.)
I say this because one time I moved a similar sized bucket of lead tire balancing weights. It was only half full (about 100 lbs) and I still struggled lifting it (to the point of a near-hernia. Charles Atlas I am not.) Even allowing for silver being less dense than lead, that size container would be extremely heavy if full.
I don't doubt there were coins in them, but not as many as claimed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you salvage(d) silver coins from long immersion in sea water, wouldn't part of the restoration process be to keep them in sea water until you get them into the electrolysis tanks? Especially if you intend to sell them individually at a premium price?
For those reasons, I don't think there were 17 tons of coins being transported, I think the claimed weight included the water they were being preserved in as well. (As I said, I could be wrong, but I'm going on the assumption that the 3 or 4 pallets shown in the photos is the whole shipment.)
I've looked at those pallets of (I assume 5 gallon) containers, and I'm thinking they were not filled up with coins (even though, IIRC, one was shown opened up and nearly filled to the brim.)
I say this because one time I moved a similar sized bucket of lead tire balancing weights. It was only half full (about 100 lbs) and I still struggled lifting it (to the point of a near-hernia. Charles Atlas I am not.) Even allowing for silver being less dense than lead, that size container would be extremely heavy if full.
I don't doubt there were coins in them, but not as many as claimed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you salvage(d) silver coins from long immersion in sea water, wouldn't part of the restoration process be to keep them in sea water until you get them into the electrolysis tanks? Especially if you intend to sell them individually at a premium price?
For those reasons, I don't think there were 17 tons of coins being transported, I think the claimed weight included the water they were being preserved in as well. (As I said, I could be wrong, but I'm going on the assumption that the 3 or 4 pallets shown in the photos is the whole shipment.)
S
shipresearcher1
Guest
Zephyr said:
ivan salis
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2007
- 16,794
- 3,810
- 🏆 Honorable Mentions:
- 1
- Detector(s) used
- delta 4000 / ace 250 - used BH and many others too
I personally believe ( due to statements made by spain's lawyers---"spain never abandons their ships" and that" salvaging any spanish ship or spanish cargo being carried by others without spanish approval was "unacceptible") that the ship may very well be the ENGLISH SHIP ---MERCHANT ROYAL which was carrying very large mixed bag assortment of coins that spanish govt put on a english ship that they "hired out" to transport their payroll money from spain to belgium to be used as payroll for spains army---there were many differant types of coins--- lots of silver and large amount of gold -- the coins were from many differant countries. ---the MERCHANT ROYAL WAS LOST ABOUT 40 MILES FROM ENGLAND ---IN WHAT IS KNOW AS THE "HIGH SEAS" ---NO COUNTRY CAN CLAIM THESE WATERS AS "THEIRS"---the ship was english ---the cargo was spanish --the area is in international waters---and the "salvors" are american-----Since the ship was english their salvage laws would normally apply---british salvage laws are rather liberal in a attempt to get people to find and return the cargoes of vessels back into the normal flow of bussiness and to cut down on "looting" the finding as stripping of cargoes without reporting them----- under british salvage law the salvors get 75% of the recovery and the english 25%---the cargo was "lost" sadly that is the risk that you run when you transport things ---sorry spain maybe you can attempt to get england to give thier 25 % to you as compension for losing "your" cargo but good luck--- Ivan
Jun 06, 2007 (Tampa Tribune - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via
COMTEX) --
A Tampa lawyer says Spain's effort to stop and search treasure-hunting ships belonging to Tampa-based Odyssey Marine Exploration is a ploy designed to force the company to the bargaining table.
A Spanish court has ordered police to stop and search two ships -- Odyssey Explorer and Ocean Alert -- should they leave the British colony of Gibraltar and enter Spanish waters, The Associated Press said Tuesday, citing news reports from Spain. The two ships and their crews may have been involved in the recovery of a sunken treasure that may be worth $500 million.
"This is 21st century political piracy," said Steve Yerrid, a maritime lawyer in Tampa. "They're seeking to hold assets and crew members hostage for some type of negotiating position for the treasure."
Odyssey's co-founder, Greg Stemm, says in a written statement that the company has nothing to hide and that Spanish authorities can board the ships any time.
"Since we have always extended an invitation to the Spanish government to visit and observe operations on our ship, we're surprised that anyone thinks a court order might be needed to inspect us," Stemm said.
Odyssey hauled the 500,000 gold and silver coins to the United States.
Spain filed claims last month in U.S. District Court in Tampa, arguing that if the treasure was recovered from a ship that sank while in service to Spain, the coins belong to Spain.
Odyssey has refused to say where the treasure was found. British officials think the shipwreck is the Merchant Royal, a British cargo ship that sank near the English Channel. The ship was carrying several tons of coins from Spain to Belgium to pay the Spanish army.
COMTEX) --
A Tampa lawyer says Spain's effort to stop and search treasure-hunting ships belonging to Tampa-based Odyssey Marine Exploration is a ploy designed to force the company to the bargaining table.
A Spanish court has ordered police to stop and search two ships -- Odyssey Explorer and Ocean Alert -- should they leave the British colony of Gibraltar and enter Spanish waters, The Associated Press said Tuesday, citing news reports from Spain. The two ships and their crews may have been involved in the recovery of a sunken treasure that may be worth $500 million.
"This is 21st century political piracy," said Steve Yerrid, a maritime lawyer in Tampa. "They're seeking to hold assets and crew members hostage for some type of negotiating position for the treasure."
Odyssey's co-founder, Greg Stemm, says in a written statement that the company has nothing to hide and that Spanish authorities can board the ships any time.
"Since we have always extended an invitation to the Spanish government to visit and observe operations on our ship, we're surprised that anyone thinks a court order might be needed to inspect us," Stemm said.
Odyssey hauled the 500,000 gold and silver coins to the United States.
Spain filed claims last month in U.S. District Court in Tampa, arguing that if the treasure was recovered from a ship that sank while in service to Spain, the coins belong to Spain.
Odyssey has refused to say where the treasure was found. British officials think the shipwreck is the Merchant Royal, a British cargo ship that sank near the English Channel. The ship was carrying several tons of coins from Spain to Belgium to pay the Spanish army.
It is going to be interesting if Spain establishes that the ship and its cargo are separable when it comes to salvage, particularly if a Manila Galleon is ever found, where the ship would have belonged to the Kingdom of Spain but the cargo to private merchants. Spain might eventually regret the ruling if they succeed in this particular case with Odyssey.
Looking forward to seeing this fight between Spain and Odyssey unfold.
Mariner
Looking forward to seeing this fight between Spain and Odyssey unfold.
Mariner
Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp
Gold Member
HI. As usual I agree with you thoroughly Mariner. I have been advocating this separation since when, particulaly in regards to the Americas..
Don Jose de La Mancha
Don Jose de La Mancha
ivan salis
Gold Member
- Feb 5, 2007
- 16,794
- 3,810
- 🏆 Honorable Mentions:
- 1
- Detector(s) used
- delta 4000 / ace 250 - used BH and many others too
SPAIN best be very careful--- historically the salvage laws that apply are the country where the "ship" that is being salvaged belongs to (where they are registered ) no matter who the cargo belongs to---- spain didn't change the ships registery to their country just because they "hired" the ENGLISH ship to haul "their cargo" for them (it was a ENGLISH ship working for the SPANISH) ---judging otherwise would cause such a legal nightmare---every ship in the world would "change" its nationality with the cargo carried and what if their carrying "mixed" cargo? 5% dutch 12% german so on and so forth how in gods name would you be able to find out who to deal with?--no it must remain the way it is to keep legal stablity in place----and historically its who owns the ship that the cargo is on that "matters" ---plus in modern day wrecks since both the ships and their cargo's are heavily insured and the insurance companies have paid for the loss of the ship and its cargo---the ships and its "cargo" belongs to the insurance companies in effect---Ivan
An Interesting scenario would be if another party took a piece of glass from the same era and went to the Admiralty court in London (as it has never seemed that you need anything from a real wreck to arrest a sunken ship) and give the similar coordinates given by Odyssey and arrest the "Merchant Royal" specifically you might get lucky, at the least Odyssey may buy out your position.
Of course there would be a great amount of money made by the lawyers but the facts stand, Odyssey are not naming the ship, probably on purpose as their original arrest warrant would be void and they would have to contend with the legal owners of the ship and lose control of their find once they named the ship and possibly the jurisdiction.
Best lock up the treasure and hope a US court would uphold their claim against a UK court. (who would be a bit pissed at Odysseys lack of loyalty to a government who already have an agreement with them) while they consolidate their position for now. But Odyssey are based in a country obsesed with the legal system (ask O.J.) and hope they have enough money to see them through.
I expect the guys who have a legal claim to the Merchant Royal are loading their guns ready for a fight with Odyssey.
I do find it odd that they have chosen to go the route they have, they are partners with the UK government on the HMS Sussex (The richest ship in the world according to Odyssey) So why did they feel they would be short changed in the UK
?? on this project, surely 90% legally of what they got is enough (90% is not the norm by the way, just something in their PR, you have to fight for every single $ in a salvage claim, I know I have filed few in my time)
They also alienate there Spanish government who they have been trying for years to work out a permission to salvage agreement on the Sussex.Which has disappeared off the horizon since this strange behaviour by Odyssey. Maybe they never wanted to review their claim to the Sussex or the story of such a great find, but used the time to track down a real live treasure ship such as the Merchant Royal? (if it is the Merchant Royal and so far it pints that way I take myhat off to them for the discovery of the location
The thing I find really sad is that they have damaged the salvage world for the future Treasure Hunters, more countries will not be as easy to deal with after this dies down.
I am pleased for you guys that have stuck with them and made some money on the stock, but the policy's they are following are damaging the future of marine salvage, soon there will be nowhere to go to search and old treasure ship for profit). Odyssey have damaged the fragile fabric of the treasure hunters world with their way of handling this).
In the end I think they will not make to much money from this as they will be tied up in court for a very long time fighting big guns. Of course some money will flow through the doors but their position is Very short sighted in my view.
But there is always another gullible investor, Tommy Thomson showed the way to do this, I hope we are not watching another episode of the same thing in front of us right now.
I've got my flame suit on so let's see what your views are on these observations of mine.
Of course there would be a great amount of money made by the lawyers but the facts stand, Odyssey are not naming the ship, probably on purpose as their original arrest warrant would be void and they would have to contend with the legal owners of the ship and lose control of their find once they named the ship and possibly the jurisdiction.
Best lock up the treasure and hope a US court would uphold their claim against a UK court. (who would be a bit pissed at Odysseys lack of loyalty to a government who already have an agreement with them) while they consolidate their position for now. But Odyssey are based in a country obsesed with the legal system (ask O.J.) and hope they have enough money to see them through.
I expect the guys who have a legal claim to the Merchant Royal are loading their guns ready for a fight with Odyssey.
I do find it odd that they have chosen to go the route they have, they are partners with the UK government on the HMS Sussex (The richest ship in the world according to Odyssey) So why did they feel they would be short changed in the UK
?? on this project, surely 90% legally of what they got is enough (90% is not the norm by the way, just something in their PR, you have to fight for every single $ in a salvage claim, I know I have filed few in my time)They also alienate there Spanish government who they have been trying for years to work out a permission to salvage agreement on the Sussex.Which has disappeared off the horizon since this strange behaviour by Odyssey. Maybe they never wanted to review their claim to the Sussex or the story of such a great find, but used the time to track down a real live treasure ship such as the Merchant Royal? (if it is the Merchant Royal and so far it pints that way I take myhat off to them for the discovery of the location
The thing I find really sad is that they have damaged the salvage world for the future Treasure Hunters, more countries will not be as easy to deal with after this dies down.
I am pleased for you guys that have stuck with them and made some money on the stock, but the policy's they are following are damaging the future of marine salvage, soon there will be nowhere to go to search and old treasure ship for profit). Odyssey have damaged the fragile fabric of the treasure hunters world with their way of handling this).
In the end I think they will not make to much money from this as they will be tied up in court for a very long time fighting big guns. Of course some money will flow through the doors but their position is Very short sighted in my view.
But there is always another gullible investor, Tommy Thomson showed the way to do this, I hope we are not watching another episode of the same thing in front of us right now.
I've got my flame suit on so let's see what your views are on these observations of mine.
spez401
Hero Member
As an attorney, I see exactly why Spain filed in Federal court. They think they MAY be entitled to a portion of the wreck (hey... 500 million is nothing to sneeze at), and they are just ensuring that any claim they do have is protected. If they wait too long, or someone else files first, they may be precluded from collecting anything. This filing ensures that their interest is on notice and protected.
Granted... the way they handled it, (or our perception of it) was a little "strong" in my opinion. But from a tactical legal standpoint, they have established their position, and therefore go to the bargaining table with a great deal of leverage. It is a two edged sword however, because if they come out so strong and alienate the other parties further (Odyssey), then they may talk themselves right out of any kind of negotiation. If so, then they have to prove their claim, and the amount they are entitled to... Not necessarily an easy task for a foreign government in our country's federal court. Regardless of what happens, it will tie the wreck and its proceeds up for quite some time.
Compare this to the smaller scale of a will. When someone wealthy dies... every possible heir crawls out of the woodwork and makes a claim. If they don't, they get nothing. so... look at Spain as the long lost, twice removed, bastard child from Odyssey's affair with that woman in the bar 30 years ago
. Jethro, um er Spain, just wants what he thinks he deserves.
Good luck to Odyssey...
steve
Granted... the way they handled it, (or our perception of it) was a little "strong" in my opinion. But from a tactical legal standpoint, they have established their position, and therefore go to the bargaining table with a great deal of leverage. It is a two edged sword however, because if they come out so strong and alienate the other parties further (Odyssey), then they may talk themselves right out of any kind of negotiation. If so, then they have to prove their claim, and the amount they are entitled to... Not necessarily an easy task for a foreign government in our country's federal court. Regardless of what happens, it will tie the wreck and its proceeds up for quite some time.
Compare this to the smaller scale of a will. When someone wealthy dies... every possible heir crawls out of the woodwork and makes a claim. If they don't, they get nothing. so... look at Spain as the long lost, twice removed, bastard child from Odyssey's affair with that woman in the bar 30 years ago
. Jethro, um er Spain, just wants what he thinks he deserves.Good luck to Odyssey...
steve
spez401
Hero Member
hmmm
when they found the wreck, along with exactly where, and all the details on the wreck are still hush hush. Odyssey isn't releasing all that information (and well they shouldn't), and probably won't for quite some time. You can probably find the date they flew the cargo into the states from one of the earlier articles. Just click on one of the "500 million dollar shipwreck" posts... there were quite a few... and there's probably a link to one of the initial articles regarding the find.
Odyssey most likely won't be releasing any information to the public any time soon. With the pending litigation, along with the possibility of pinpointing exactly where the wreck is, looting, etc, their best policy is to be hush hush.
steve
when they found the wreck, along with exactly where, and all the details on the wreck are still hush hush. Odyssey isn't releasing all that information (and well they shouldn't), and probably won't for quite some time. You can probably find the date they flew the cargo into the states from one of the earlier articles. Just click on one of the "500 million dollar shipwreck" posts... there were quite a few... and there's probably a link to one of the initial articles regarding the find.
Odyssey most likely won't be releasing any information to the public any time soon. With the pending litigation, along with the possibility of pinpointing exactly where the wreck is, looting, etc, their best policy is to be hush hush.
steve
- May 20, 2004
- 1,721
- 152
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab Excal 1000
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Odyssey looks like leaving soon according to remarks at court
gibfocus - 11th June 2007
( 2007-06-11 12:50:00)
The departure of Odyssey Marine Exploration vessels seems to be closer according to unchecked remarks made today before the courts.
According to official sources, a crew member of one of the Odyssey Marine Exploration vessels has today been attributed comments for the process of a court fine to be made as soon as possible due to the fact he was expecting his vessel to leave port “very soon.” The comments were made after a minor hearing in which the crew member was expected to pay a fine.
Although not revealing the date in which the vessels were expected to depart Gibraltar, the comments are the first to be made in public which has given an indication to the possible departure of the vessels from their present berths at the Naval Base since reports that the Spanish courts had ordered its Navy and Guardia Civil to arrest the vessels.
The departure of the vessels is seen by observers as a possible precursor to what many expect to be an international dispute over territorial waters.
Although the vessels are not expected to be arrested within Gibraltar waters, the latest reports suggest that the vessels had been operating some 30 miles off the Spanish coastline. This has led to a belief that the controversy over the location of the treasure will give rise to a debate over what constitutes Spanish territorial waters on the Atlantic side, and not as believed over Bay of Gibraltar waters. Whilst Spanish naval vessels are expected within the region in the coming days, there has been no indication by Spain over any possible arrests within Gibraltar waters.
With the vessels expected to resume their operations in the same area the treasure was uncovered, the debate over territorial waters and exploration rights is expected to be the main focal point in any action taken by Spain. Whilst internationally some countries dispute that the 200 mile limit claims, Spain has in the past claimed territorial rights control over up to 200 miles from its shorelines. Operations at 30 miles have been disputed as not infringing on territorial claims, according to some experts. The difference of opinion over the 12 mile, 24 mile and 200 mile limits has seen the international community continue the debate over what is the legitimate claims over waters beyond those recognised by the international community.
With the sunken shipwreck believed to be beyond the 30 miles from the Spanish shoreline, which Spain considers as its own territorial waters and many in the international community disputing, any claim within the limits claimed by Spain to be within their territorial waters could see a lengthy debate over what constitutes international waters and territorial waters before the claims over the sunken treasure found by Odyssey Marine Exploration is resolved.
With suggestions already pointing towards the treasure also possibly originating from South America, the debate over the historical ownership of the treasure could also be amongst one of the key issues which could see the debate over the treasure prolonging itself.
Spain’s plundering of South America’s treasure and wealth during the conquest of America could be a key issue in the debate. Whilst Spanish media reports continue to claim that Odyssey Marine Exploration operations were mainly in the Mediterranean, gibfocus last week revealed that the vessel had been pinpointed by Spanish tracking systems in the Atlantic side operating 30 miles off the Spanish coastline. This has led to a belief that the sunken treasure could be located in Atlantic waters.
There, however, continues to exist a lack of legitimate information in the public domain over the location of the treasure, its origins and from which shipwreck it was obtained. The lack of details has led to a flurry of media speculation which has seen the treasure being described as that of a British vessel, to a Spanish frigate, to the location claimed to be in the Mediterranean, Alboran, close to the shorelines of Britain, and off the coastline of Spain on the Atlantic side. The only information available is that from the company who originally stated it was beyond any territorial waters.
gibfocus - 11th June 2007
( 2007-06-11 12:50:00)
The departure of Odyssey Marine Exploration vessels seems to be closer according to unchecked remarks made today before the courts.
According to official sources, a crew member of one of the Odyssey Marine Exploration vessels has today been attributed comments for the process of a court fine to be made as soon as possible due to the fact he was expecting his vessel to leave port “very soon.” The comments were made after a minor hearing in which the crew member was expected to pay a fine.
Although not revealing the date in which the vessels were expected to depart Gibraltar, the comments are the first to be made in public which has given an indication to the possible departure of the vessels from their present berths at the Naval Base since reports that the Spanish courts had ordered its Navy and Guardia Civil to arrest the vessels.
The departure of the vessels is seen by observers as a possible precursor to what many expect to be an international dispute over territorial waters.
Although the vessels are not expected to be arrested within Gibraltar waters, the latest reports suggest that the vessels had been operating some 30 miles off the Spanish coastline. This has led to a belief that the controversy over the location of the treasure will give rise to a debate over what constitutes Spanish territorial waters on the Atlantic side, and not as believed over Bay of Gibraltar waters. Whilst Spanish naval vessels are expected within the region in the coming days, there has been no indication by Spain over any possible arrests within Gibraltar waters.
With the vessels expected to resume their operations in the same area the treasure was uncovered, the debate over territorial waters and exploration rights is expected to be the main focal point in any action taken by Spain. Whilst internationally some countries dispute that the 200 mile limit claims, Spain has in the past claimed territorial rights control over up to 200 miles from its shorelines. Operations at 30 miles have been disputed as not infringing on territorial claims, according to some experts. The difference of opinion over the 12 mile, 24 mile and 200 mile limits has seen the international community continue the debate over what is the legitimate claims over waters beyond those recognised by the international community.
With the sunken shipwreck believed to be beyond the 30 miles from the Spanish shoreline, which Spain considers as its own territorial waters and many in the international community disputing, any claim within the limits claimed by Spain to be within their territorial waters could see a lengthy debate over what constitutes international waters and territorial waters before the claims over the sunken treasure found by Odyssey Marine Exploration is resolved.
With suggestions already pointing towards the treasure also possibly originating from South America, the debate over the historical ownership of the treasure could also be amongst one of the key issues which could see the debate over the treasure prolonging itself.
Spain’s plundering of South America’s treasure and wealth during the conquest of America could be a key issue in the debate. Whilst Spanish media reports continue to claim that Odyssey Marine Exploration operations were mainly in the Mediterranean, gibfocus last week revealed that the vessel had been pinpointed by Spanish tracking systems in the Atlantic side operating 30 miles off the Spanish coastline. This has led to a belief that the sunken treasure could be located in Atlantic waters.
There, however, continues to exist a lack of legitimate information in the public domain over the location of the treasure, its origins and from which shipwreck it was obtained. The lack of details has led to a flurry of media speculation which has seen the treasure being described as that of a British vessel, to a Spanish frigate, to the location claimed to be in the Mediterranean, Alboran, close to the shorelines of Britain, and off the coastline of Spain on the Atlantic side. The only information available is that from the company who originally stated it was beyond any territorial waters.
hmmm
Hero Member
- Jun 9, 2007
- 830
- 95
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
how long would it take to do a proper archeological excivation, to insure you got it all, makeing sure to log all the stuff you leave behind. like the mast rings broken glass ect. It should be easy to find the departure point of the ship, if there was raw ore.
piratediver
Sr. Member
Another Odyssey inspired article:
Scrutiny of the bounty
Treasure ship's half-billion-dollar question: Who owns the past?
By MICHAEL A. MOHAMMED
Published June 10, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pounded by a storm on the last leg of a five-week journey, the Merchant Royal limped through the sea on Sept. 23, 1641, weighed down by tons of gold, silver and jewels.
Its 80-man crew feverishly worked two pumps to keep out the ocean that was leaking through the groaning and gapping planks of the Royal.
Though the ship was privately owned by Britons, it carried a load of treasure fresh from Spain's American mines. The doubloons' original courier, a Spanish treasure ship, had arrived at the Azores islands aflame. Spanish authorities put out the fires and hired the 700-ton Royal to complete the trip, not unusual when the lines of public and private, nationality and allegiance, crossed in far different ways than today.
When the news reached London, Britain's secretary of state interrupted Parliament to announce that the Royal had sunk 10 leagues, or roughly 30 miles, off Land's End, the country's southwestern point. It was one of the largest seafaring disasters of the time.
According to a contemporaneous account in Ye Olde Maile, as the ship and its crew approached the English channel, "night came on and foule weather, they plyed their two chaine pumps, in midst of which labour both the pumpe chaines broke at once and fell into the wells."
Most of the crew escaped in a longboat to be rescued by the Dover Merchant, a smaller ship accompanying the Royal on its journey.
Seven men, the broadsheet says, ran down to fill their pockets with treasure and drowned in the ship as it sank.
"The Captaine was the last, who would not forsake her until she was sunke even unto her cook-roome ports."
Now, the Merchant Royal might return from the sea, complete with its silver, gold, jewels and 36 bronze cannon.
And with recovery will come questions. Who owns treasure from a different time, a different world? Spain, the country that mined the gold and silver? England, the country whose ship transported it? The descendants of the slaves who dug it out of mines in the bowels of the Earth? The captain whose ship and personal fortune sunk? Or is it finder's keepers?
And if a country lays a claim, how similar is, say, the England of 1641 - in which civil war was about to break out and a king to lose his head - to the England of today? Can a ship that went down in one world, a mere 21 years after the Pilgrims reached Plymouth Rock, be claimed by another, ours? If the rule of law reaches so far back, can people or nations be held accountable for transgressions such as slavery from those same times?
Recovery
Last month, Tampa-based Odyssey Marine Exploration released footage of gold and silver coins it says came from a shipwreck. The company has been tight-lipped about the ship's identity, saying officials still need to verify it.
British shipwreck historian Richard Larn, who maintains the seven-volume, nearly 50, 000-entry Lloyd's Shipwreck Index of the British Isles, said he's almost certain Odyssey has found the Royal.
Larn lives near Land's End, Britain's southwest tip. For two years, local fishermen have watched Odyssey's sonar ships combing the sea about 24 miles from Larn's home.
"That's the rough area where the records say that the Merchant Royal sank, " Larn said, and the Royal is the only wreck anywhere near the English Channel that holds the amount of treasure Odyssey recovered.
At a shipwreck conference in 2005, Larn added, Odyssey co-founder Greg Stemm asked him if he knew anything that might aid the company in a search for the Merchant Royal.
When he found out last month about the company's find, "I was very pleased for them and I was very envious, " Larn said.
Fragile history
Some archaeologists, however, worry that a for-profit company like Odyssey could overlook the Royal's enormous historical value, erasing traces of the past that exist nowhere else.
"I have to part ways fundamentally with the idea of selling what is found, " said Jim Delgado, executive director of the Institute of Nautical Archaeology at Texas A&M University. "The flash of gold and silver often obscures the history."
He added that a colonial-era ship like the Royal could teach historians a great deal about the period.
"We know more about Roman seafaring than we know about the role of ships in the rise of the modern world economy, " he said.
Subtle clues that might seem worthless to treasure hunters can lead to major discoveries for historians. For example, the scatter pattern of a decaying ship's cargo can help experts figure out what the ship looked like - but only if the wreckage is carefully photographed before any items are moved.
Delgado gave another vivid example, from the "Gelidonya wreck, " a merchant ship that sank 3, 000 years ago off the Turkish coast. The team excavating the site found a box filled with "concretion, " a hardened mix of oxidized metal and dirt. By slicing up the block, they found perfect impressions of a Bronze Age woodworker's tools.
"Archaeology costs. When you have shareholders seeking the maximum profit, extensive archaeology gets in the way, " he said. When it comes to commercially salvaged shipwrecks, "in every case I'm aware of, commercial value has outstripped scientific value."
The waters around Florida are filled with ruined wrecks, places where treasure hunters used explosives or the force of their propellers to grind the site up in search of gold.
"If we have, say, a fish population in the gulf, we can change laws and regulations so hopefully they bounce back, " said University of West Florida archaeologist Greg Cook. "The problem with shipwrecks is they don't bounce back."
'Unbelievable validation'
Larn, the British historian, agreed that commercial companies are more likely than academics to damage a site - but said if the treasure hunters didn't find it, no one would.
"If companies like Odyssey and others didn't go out to do it many shipwrecks would never have been found, " Larn said.
John Opperman, who heads Odyssey's archaeology, research and conservation team, defended the publicly traded company's mission.
"Obviously our shareholders want us to come up with shiny discs - they get jazzed about it - but we want the artifacts that tell a story, " he said.
He gave the example of the mustard barrels and Worcestershire sauce bottles recovered from Odyssey's single previous discovery, a 19th-century paddlewheel steamer, the SS Republic.
"The food probably didn't taste too well back then, hence all the sauces, " Opperman said.
Opperman himself is not a trained archaeologist. A former telecommunications consultant, he helps the company's four full-time and 12 part-time archaeologists direct the marine operations team, which drives the ships and deep-water robots.
He said "best-practice archaeology" is the team's "mantra." The fact that they found the trove shows the research expertise of the team, he said.
Opperman referred to the ship as the "Black Swan, " Odyssey's code-name for the discovery.
He called it an "unbelievable validation that our principles of research and archaeology really, really made that happen."
A fraught claim
Even after all that work, Odyssey's bonanza is not yet secure. Some experts have suggested Odyssey knows which ship it has found but stays mum to ward off history's hold on the wreck.
The Spanish government, for example, has already pledged to take the company to court over the treasure it lost so long ago. But the world has changed a great deal since 1641.
For Delgado, the Texas A&M archaeologist, the "Black Swan" controversy is about "who owns the past, and what the most appropriate uses of the past are."
And who knows - Spain used slaves to rip the gold, silver and jewels from the earth. Their descendants might want a cut.
By 1641, Europe had spent decades choked by war. Spain had been fighting the Dutch for more than 70 years to maintain its empire in the Low Countries, and planned to use the Royal's cargo pay its soldiers in Flanders. Meanwhile, the Thirty Years' War raged in Germany between most of the countries in Western Europe.
By the time both wars ended in 1648, Europe had been devastated. In Germany alone, an estimated 20 percent of the population had succumbed to fighting, famine and disease.
Meanwhile the Spanish empire - one of the largest in history - entered its twilight. Since the mid 1500s, Spanish conquistadores had dominated indigenous cultures throughout the Americas. Remnants of the Aztecs, Mayans and Incas labored to send gold and silver to Spain's armies in Europe.
A careful examination could generate "sympathy for the people whose lives were rolled under and plundered, " said Delgado, as well as for the hard-bitten sailors who worked on the ship. "You start putting voices back into the record for people whose story was never written down."
That old British broadsheet described Capt. John Limbrey's depression at the loss of his ship:
"The Captaine on his landing repaired to his house and family, with a hankercher about his neck, and will not be seen or spoken with (as yet) by any his grief is so great."
Which, incidentally, introduces yet another claim on the bullion: Limbrey's descendants could try to recover part of their ancestor's personal fortune, which sank with the ship.
Michael A. Mohammed can be reached at mmohammed@ sptimes.com or (813) 226-3404.
Scrutiny of the bounty
Treasure ship's half-billion-dollar question: Who owns the past?
By MICHAEL A. MOHAMMED
Published June 10, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pounded by a storm on the last leg of a five-week journey, the Merchant Royal limped through the sea on Sept. 23, 1641, weighed down by tons of gold, silver and jewels.
Its 80-man crew feverishly worked two pumps to keep out the ocean that was leaking through the groaning and gapping planks of the Royal.
Though the ship was privately owned by Britons, it carried a load of treasure fresh from Spain's American mines. The doubloons' original courier, a Spanish treasure ship, had arrived at the Azores islands aflame. Spanish authorities put out the fires and hired the 700-ton Royal to complete the trip, not unusual when the lines of public and private, nationality and allegiance, crossed in far different ways than today.
When the news reached London, Britain's secretary of state interrupted Parliament to announce that the Royal had sunk 10 leagues, or roughly 30 miles, off Land's End, the country's southwestern point. It was one of the largest seafaring disasters of the time.
According to a contemporaneous account in Ye Olde Maile, as the ship and its crew approached the English channel, "night came on and foule weather, they plyed their two chaine pumps, in midst of which labour both the pumpe chaines broke at once and fell into the wells."
Most of the crew escaped in a longboat to be rescued by the Dover Merchant, a smaller ship accompanying the Royal on its journey.
Seven men, the broadsheet says, ran down to fill their pockets with treasure and drowned in the ship as it sank.
"The Captaine was the last, who would not forsake her until she was sunke even unto her cook-roome ports."
Now, the Merchant Royal might return from the sea, complete with its silver, gold, jewels and 36 bronze cannon.
And with recovery will come questions. Who owns treasure from a different time, a different world? Spain, the country that mined the gold and silver? England, the country whose ship transported it? The descendants of the slaves who dug it out of mines in the bowels of the Earth? The captain whose ship and personal fortune sunk? Or is it finder's keepers?
And if a country lays a claim, how similar is, say, the England of 1641 - in which civil war was about to break out and a king to lose his head - to the England of today? Can a ship that went down in one world, a mere 21 years after the Pilgrims reached Plymouth Rock, be claimed by another, ours? If the rule of law reaches so far back, can people or nations be held accountable for transgressions such as slavery from those same times?
Recovery
Last month, Tampa-based Odyssey Marine Exploration released footage of gold and silver coins it says came from a shipwreck. The company has been tight-lipped about the ship's identity, saying officials still need to verify it.
British shipwreck historian Richard Larn, who maintains the seven-volume, nearly 50, 000-entry Lloyd's Shipwreck Index of the British Isles, said he's almost certain Odyssey has found the Royal.
Larn lives near Land's End, Britain's southwest tip. For two years, local fishermen have watched Odyssey's sonar ships combing the sea about 24 miles from Larn's home.
"That's the rough area where the records say that the Merchant Royal sank, " Larn said, and the Royal is the only wreck anywhere near the English Channel that holds the amount of treasure Odyssey recovered.
At a shipwreck conference in 2005, Larn added, Odyssey co-founder Greg Stemm asked him if he knew anything that might aid the company in a search for the Merchant Royal.
When he found out last month about the company's find, "I was very pleased for them and I was very envious, " Larn said.
Fragile history
Some archaeologists, however, worry that a for-profit company like Odyssey could overlook the Royal's enormous historical value, erasing traces of the past that exist nowhere else.
"I have to part ways fundamentally with the idea of selling what is found, " said Jim Delgado, executive director of the Institute of Nautical Archaeology at Texas A&M University. "The flash of gold and silver often obscures the history."
He added that a colonial-era ship like the Royal could teach historians a great deal about the period.
"We know more about Roman seafaring than we know about the role of ships in the rise of the modern world economy, " he said.
Subtle clues that might seem worthless to treasure hunters can lead to major discoveries for historians. For example, the scatter pattern of a decaying ship's cargo can help experts figure out what the ship looked like - but only if the wreckage is carefully photographed before any items are moved.
Delgado gave another vivid example, from the "Gelidonya wreck, " a merchant ship that sank 3, 000 years ago off the Turkish coast. The team excavating the site found a box filled with "concretion, " a hardened mix of oxidized metal and dirt. By slicing up the block, they found perfect impressions of a Bronze Age woodworker's tools.
"Archaeology costs. When you have shareholders seeking the maximum profit, extensive archaeology gets in the way, " he said. When it comes to commercially salvaged shipwrecks, "in every case I'm aware of, commercial value has outstripped scientific value."
The waters around Florida are filled with ruined wrecks, places where treasure hunters used explosives or the force of their propellers to grind the site up in search of gold.
"If we have, say, a fish population in the gulf, we can change laws and regulations so hopefully they bounce back, " said University of West Florida archaeologist Greg Cook. "The problem with shipwrecks is they don't bounce back."
'Unbelievable validation'
Larn, the British historian, agreed that commercial companies are more likely than academics to damage a site - but said if the treasure hunters didn't find it, no one would.
"If companies like Odyssey and others didn't go out to do it many shipwrecks would never have been found, " Larn said.
John Opperman, who heads Odyssey's archaeology, research and conservation team, defended the publicly traded company's mission.
"Obviously our shareholders want us to come up with shiny discs - they get jazzed about it - but we want the artifacts that tell a story, " he said.
He gave the example of the mustard barrels and Worcestershire sauce bottles recovered from Odyssey's single previous discovery, a 19th-century paddlewheel steamer, the SS Republic.
"The food probably didn't taste too well back then, hence all the sauces, " Opperman said.
Opperman himself is not a trained archaeologist. A former telecommunications consultant, he helps the company's four full-time and 12 part-time archaeologists direct the marine operations team, which drives the ships and deep-water robots.
He said "best-practice archaeology" is the team's "mantra." The fact that they found the trove shows the research expertise of the team, he said.
Opperman referred to the ship as the "Black Swan, " Odyssey's code-name for the discovery.
He called it an "unbelievable validation that our principles of research and archaeology really, really made that happen."
A fraught claim
Even after all that work, Odyssey's bonanza is not yet secure. Some experts have suggested Odyssey knows which ship it has found but stays mum to ward off history's hold on the wreck.
The Spanish government, for example, has already pledged to take the company to court over the treasure it lost so long ago. But the world has changed a great deal since 1641.
For Delgado, the Texas A&M archaeologist, the "Black Swan" controversy is about "who owns the past, and what the most appropriate uses of the past are."
And who knows - Spain used slaves to rip the gold, silver and jewels from the earth. Their descendants might want a cut.
By 1641, Europe had spent decades choked by war. Spain had been fighting the Dutch for more than 70 years to maintain its empire in the Low Countries, and planned to use the Royal's cargo pay its soldiers in Flanders. Meanwhile, the Thirty Years' War raged in Germany between most of the countries in Western Europe.
By the time both wars ended in 1648, Europe had been devastated. In Germany alone, an estimated 20 percent of the population had succumbed to fighting, famine and disease.
Meanwhile the Spanish empire - one of the largest in history - entered its twilight. Since the mid 1500s, Spanish conquistadores had dominated indigenous cultures throughout the Americas. Remnants of the Aztecs, Mayans and Incas labored to send gold and silver to Spain's armies in Europe.
A careful examination could generate "sympathy for the people whose lives were rolled under and plundered, " said Delgado, as well as for the hard-bitten sailors who worked on the ship. "You start putting voices back into the record for people whose story was never written down."
That old British broadsheet described Capt. John Limbrey's depression at the loss of his ship:
"The Captaine on his landing repaired to his house and family, with a hankercher about his neck, and will not be seen or spoken with (as yet) by any his grief is so great."
Which, incidentally, introduces yet another claim on the bullion: Limbrey's descendants could try to recover part of their ancestor's personal fortune, which sank with the ship.
Michael A. Mohammed can be reached at mmohammed@ sptimes.com or (813) 226-3404.
- May 20, 2004
- 1,721
- 152
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab Excal 1000
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Odyssey misinformation continues from some Spanish media sectors - departure today confirmed to be false.
gibfocus - 12th June 2007
(2007-06-12 23:45:00 )
At 19.00hrs on Tuesday evening once again the Spanish media frenzy on misinformation was at full swing as some Spanish journalists, informed by a supposed journalistic expert in maritime affairs and working mainly for a regional newspaper, made claims that the Odyssey Marine Exploration vessels were due to leave Gibraltar.
With the reports spread like wild fire through the Spanish regional and national media, the immediate reaction was for the Spanish Guardia Civil to be placed in a state of preparedness for the possible arrest of the two US vessels berthed at present in Gibraltar.
The massive media interest generated by the presence of the two Odyssey vessels in Gibraltar and the La Linea court order to arrest them had fuelled enough interest for a flurry of enquiries to Gibraltar on whether the vessels were leaving Gibraltar or not.
Spanish press who made legitimate enquiries and confirmed their information were soon made aware that the vessels continued at berth and had not moved. At 19.57 the vessels were still at their berths, and even at 20.57 the vessels had not moved. This was photographed by gibfocus, who were themselves filmed by a television crew whilst doing so.
The misinformation, whilst not having been cut at its roots, at least once again was proven to exist unchecked by some less scrupulous media services.
As the media reports and misinformation continued, much in the same way as in the past week, gibfocus learnt that the departure of the vessels in the coming days had been delayed due to the possible implications to regional relations if an arrest were to take place in Gibraltar waters. Aware of the possibility that the two vessels could depart Gibraltar and be arrested whilst operating in the promotional activities for the Pirates of the Carribean film, the US company is believed to have been requested to delay its departure so as not to create a regional confrontation.
The company, according to well informed sources, has acknowledged the concerns and indicated that it will consider the concerns before resuming its original plans.
Any possible departure on 12th June was thus totally dismissed and rejected, with the vessels presence at the naval base this evening once again highlighting how a continuous stream of “misinformation” in some instances originating from so-called Spanish maritime journalistic experts, continues unchecked, even though the credibility of information released by some Spanish media services has once again been proven flawed.
The events this evening, as has been the case during the past week, have paralleled the HMS Tireless saga in which a stream of misinformation by some unscrupulous regional media services went unchecked, increasing tensions between the two regions.
http://www.gibfocus.gi/details_headlines.php?id=1412
gibfocus - 12th June 2007
(2007-06-12 23:45:00 )
At 19.00hrs on Tuesday evening once again the Spanish media frenzy on misinformation was at full swing as some Spanish journalists, informed by a supposed journalistic expert in maritime affairs and working mainly for a regional newspaper, made claims that the Odyssey Marine Exploration vessels were due to leave Gibraltar.
With the reports spread like wild fire through the Spanish regional and national media, the immediate reaction was for the Spanish Guardia Civil to be placed in a state of preparedness for the possible arrest of the two US vessels berthed at present in Gibraltar.
The massive media interest generated by the presence of the two Odyssey vessels in Gibraltar and the La Linea court order to arrest them had fuelled enough interest for a flurry of enquiries to Gibraltar on whether the vessels were leaving Gibraltar or not.
Spanish press who made legitimate enquiries and confirmed their information were soon made aware that the vessels continued at berth and had not moved. At 19.57 the vessels were still at their berths, and even at 20.57 the vessels had not moved. This was photographed by gibfocus, who were themselves filmed by a television crew whilst doing so.
The misinformation, whilst not having been cut at its roots, at least once again was proven to exist unchecked by some less scrupulous media services.
As the media reports and misinformation continued, much in the same way as in the past week, gibfocus learnt that the departure of the vessels in the coming days had been delayed due to the possible implications to regional relations if an arrest were to take place in Gibraltar waters. Aware of the possibility that the two vessels could depart Gibraltar and be arrested whilst operating in the promotional activities for the Pirates of the Carribean film, the US company is believed to have been requested to delay its departure so as not to create a regional confrontation.
The company, according to well informed sources, has acknowledged the concerns and indicated that it will consider the concerns before resuming its original plans.
Any possible departure on 12th June was thus totally dismissed and rejected, with the vessels presence at the naval base this evening once again highlighting how a continuous stream of “misinformation” in some instances originating from so-called Spanish maritime journalistic experts, continues unchecked, even though the credibility of information released by some Spanish media services has once again been proven flawed.
The events this evening, as has been the case during the past week, have paralleled the HMS Tireless saga in which a stream of misinformation by some unscrupulous regional media services went unchecked, increasing tensions between the two regions.
http://www.gibfocus.gi/details_headlines.php?id=1412
