UK

Partly Sunny with Showers 14° London Hi 16°C / Lo 8°C

Intrepid treasure-hunters – or archaeological vandals?

A marine exploration company has found HMS Victory's remains. But not everyone is pleased

By Cahal Milmo and Jerome Taylor

Odyssey's hi-tech submersible

AP

Odyssey's hi-tech submersible

At 3.30pm on 4 October 1744, the Royal Navy flotilla accompanying HMS Victory caught what was to be their last glimpse of their flagship as it drifted over the horizon in stormy seas off the Channel Islands.

Laden with four tons of Portuguese gold, the pride of the British navy – and direct predecessor to Admiral Nelson's vessel of the same name – sank with all 1,150 of its crew. Only the shattered remains of its top-mast were found on a Guernsey beach as evidence of its terrible fate.

But yesterday the ability of that majestic and – for its time – technically advanced man-of-war to evoke dreams of vast riches was revived when an American treasure-hunting company announced that it had found the Victory and is planning to salvage its precious cargo from the depths of the English Channel.

Archaeologists accuse the Florida-based Odyssey Marine Exploration of combining hi-tech surveying methods with commercial ambition. They have also attacked the Ministry of Defence for "indulging in hypocrisy", after it emerged that the ministry is in negotiations with Odyssey to share the proceeds. If all the bullion being carried by the Victory is recovered, it is estimated that it could be worth as much as £700m.

To its supporters, Odyssey is a reputable, publicly listed company that follows strict archaeological guidelines in a legitimate search for sunken vessels around the globe.

But its detractors, ranging from leading archaeological bodies to the Spanish government, claim the treasure hunters hide behind a veneer of scientific probity as they harness technology to profit from the world's sunken heritage.

"If Odyssey is allowed to go ahead with this operation, it will cause uproar," said Mike Williams, a specialist on maritime law at the University of Wolverhampton and secretary of the Nautical Archaeology Society. "There are very hard questions to be answered about whether these sites should be recovered, and in particular whether the British government should be sanctioning that recovery."

Odyssey is already locked in a bitter legal dispute with the Spanish authorities over 500,000 gold and silver coins recovered from a wreck it has labelled Black Swan, and which Madrid insists is the Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes, a treasure-laden Spanish frigate sunk in 1804.

Odyssey unveiled its latest find at press conferences held simultaneously in London and New York yesterday. It revealed it had recovered a four-ton bronze cannon emblazoned with the crest of George I – a weapon that only the Victory, the last Royal Navy vessel to be armed entirely with bronze guns, was allowed to carry.

The company, which threw a veil of secrecy over its operations after the find last May, claimed the wreck is vulnerable to fishing trawlers and unscrupulous salvagers and that urgent action is therefore needed to recover the remaining 39 cannons, worth at least £30,000 each, and other "items of value". Odyssey has declined to state whether it has found any of the Portuguese bullion.

Greg Stemm, a former advertising executive who is Odyssey's CEO, said the value of the goods on board the Victory was secondary to the historical importance of the find: "HMS Victory was the mightiest vessel of the 18th century and the eclectic mix of guns we found on the site will prove essential in further refining our understanding of naval weaponry used during the era."

Under international law, the wreck and its contents remain the property of the Government. The Independent understands that Odyssey is in negotiations with the Ministry of Defence to strike an agreement on similar lines to a deal signed in 2002 following the discovery of the remains of another Royal Navy gunship, the HMS Sussex, which sank off Gibraltar in 1694 with £300m-worth of gold on board. Under the terms of that deal, Odyssey gets a sliding share of the proceeds from the sale of any recovered property, up to £250m.

But archaeologists and lawyers said yesterday that a similar deal for HMS Victory would amount to the abandonment of Britain's obligations under Unesco's Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage, a convention which in 2005 the Government agreed to respect, without formally signing it.

Dr Williams said: "For the Ministry of Defence to now enter into a deal to recover the remains of HMS Victory would be to indulge in hypocrisy.

"The annexe to the convention makes it clear that a site should be left undisturbed wherever possible – as this one has been for 265 years – and that if artefacts are recovered they should not be used for commercial sale. At the same time, there is a public education campaign, funded by the Government, which seeks to tell anyone diving on a wreck never to remove anything from it. If they then exploit the Victory it will mean the complete dilution of that message."

Odyssey said it was abiding by stringent archaeological guidelines and retained the right to seek financial reward for its work.

Mr Stemm said: "Odyssey, not the taxpayer, spends its own money on the archaeological side of things. Once the entire collection is properly accounted for, it is handed over to the Government. At that point it is up to the Government to decide how to compensate us."

The company's stance was defended by Sir Robert Balchin, a direct descendent of Sir John Balchin, a much-revered 18th-century admiral who went down with the Victory in 1744, and who was blamed for sailing the ship on to rocks off Alderney.

The location of the wreck, which is being kept secret, shows that it did not founder because of navigational error.

A former director of St John Ambulance, Sir Robert said: "I can't tell you what I felt when I saw that cannon. It was as if a piece of not just my family history, but national history, had come alive again. I am very clear that the artefacts that are down there should be brought up from the deep. [They] will add enormously to our knowledge of Britain's 18th-century navy."

Odyssey wrecks

Black Swan

A colonial-era galleon discovered in the Atlantic in 2007 with 17 tons of silver and gold coins, which were flown out of Gibraltar to Florida. The Spanish government has since filed a claim that the Black Swan is in fact its own vessel Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes, and demanded the return of the treasure. Odyssey disputes the claim.

HMS Sussex

The Royal Navy ship sank off Gibraltar in 1694 with up to 10 tons of gold coins on board, making it one of the most valuable wrecks ever. Odyssey signed a deal with the Government to recover the bullion, but Spain's authorities have prevented it from returning to the site.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Vandals!
[info]tovasco wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 06:55 am (UTC)
Yes vandals. It should be kept as is and saved for the nation like that painting thingy. Then we can all visit it.
Selfishness and greed.
[info]anthony_mark wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 09:13 am (UTC)
The wreck is the final resting place of 1,150 souls. This is nothing other than grave robbery.
[info]pattern_chaser wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 10:09 am (UTC)
Grave robbing for fun and profit.

:-(
Burke, Hare, and Mr Stemm.
[info]jon_dole wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 11:14 am (UTC)
It used to be the case that wartime wrecks were protected by international law due to the fact that men had died aboard these vessels and, as such, were due some respect to be left in peace. It would appear that this practice has largely been ignored by Mr Stemm, Odyssey's CEO, and the Ministry of Defence on the grounds of 'historical importance'. Is it any surprise that the only vessels that appear to be of 'historical importance' are the bullion ships of the last 500 years? The HMS Victory was, for all intents and purposes, the Securitas of its day. It was a vessel that utilised cannon to deter any would-be pirate, thief, or hijacker from intercepting Great Britain's booty on it's treacherous trip from foreign climes to the coffers of the Exchequer. The simple fact is that vessels such as the Odyssey cannot run their operations without going for valuable salvage such as the Victory or the Sussex and the fact that they try and veil this simple fact with a smokescreen of 'historical importance' merely adds insult to injury. The Royal Navy of the time operated a system whereby every sailor aboard its ships, from Captain to Cabin-boy, was entitled to a percentage share of the booty from a successful voyage before the majority was given over to the Exchequer upon return to Britain. Bearing that in mind should it not be the case that living relatives of the Victory's crew should be entitled to a cut from the recovered bullion? Would that not be a fair and just system? Whether such a system would be workable is open to debate but I'm sure it would be deemed as unworkable by the Royal Navy, and unthinkable by the Odyssey Plc. The recovery of the Victory's cargo is merely a commercial venture with a negligible interest in artefacts of 'historical importance'! Blow away the veil of lies and you're left with the bare bones of this venture, the Odyssey and it's crew are grave-robbers and, like Burke and Hare, they stand to make a tidy profit from their activities.
treasure
[info]aleppo_chili wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 12:55 pm (UTC)
No matter how you dress it up, its all about the benjamins! Public sector or private sector, it doesn't matter.
Come on
[info]tovasco wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 12:56 pm (UTC)
So when did salvaging riches from below become unacceptable. If it sank yesterday we would be all over it like flies on a cowpat trying to salvage the dosh (sorry, recover the bodies). If it had gone down a thousand years ago it would be a major archeological find and no one would have worried about the sailors who went with it. If it was buried with a bunch of Saxons we would be sticking it in a museum for all to see after settling up with the finder. So what is the problem? A scattered bunch of bones of which no one alive for 200 years knows the owners. I think just about every sailor who ever lived would be up for salvaging this horde. I speak as an ex sailor.
Victory
[info]shpwrk1 wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 02:01 pm (UTC)
Interestingly the archaeologists that are so very against this work use verbiage such as "exploit" instead of salvage or rescue. And the UK is not, as far as I'm aware, a signatory to the UNESCO convention. The recovery of historically important items such as the HMS Victory cannot be left in the hands of folks who clearly have a self serving interest, such as "if we don't get to do it nobody should" which is really what this is all about. Trawling is a very real threat to underwater historical objects and while I agree that archaeological tecnniques and recordation should most certainly be used I do not agree that it is only archaeologist that should be allowed to recover these important items. they simply do not have access to the technology nor the expertise to use it. Public/private partnerships such as those undertaken by Odyssey and the MOD are the way of the future. If the archaeologists are really concerned about the "underwater cultural resources" why not join in trying to guide these activities and shape the future instead of just bashing what is obviously a successful group?
With the sad realization that this will not sway a soul in the archaeological community,
I remain,
James Sinclair, BA, MA
Archaeologist
Re: Victory
[info]lima_charlie wrote:
Tuesday, 3 February 2009 at 10:05 pm (UTC)
I assume this is James Sinclair, President of ShipREX?
Looks like you're already getting on with some of your stated aims...
http://www.imacdigest.com/position.html
Sea treasure
[info]fox2step wrote:
Wednesday, 4 February 2009 at 12:33 am (UTC)
Finders Keepers.
Why not compensate?
[info]calgary_gal wrote:
Wednesday, 4 February 2009 at 03:29 am (UTC)
I agree with the salvage company that they should be compensated and have a say and a share in what was reclaimed. If they hadn't found it at great expense and effort, there would be nothing to argue about...it would all still be sitting in the ocean depths. If countries want to claim these wrecks then why don't they form teams and fund excavations to go off and find them? They don't and won't so they have nothing to gripe about in my opinion. That this company hands over the find and awaits the pleasure of the government to decide the outcome, is testament to their ethics.
[info]mia_white wrote:
Monday, 6 July 2009 at 09:01 pm (UTC)
They do not have the right to do that!
If they do bring up the bullion, it belongs in a museum, not in a bank!
I bet that whoever gets this, and I assume it'll be the Spanish (once a plunderer, always a plunderer even centuries later) it will not be open to the public.
They are definately vandals. But I still crave to see it. I feel torn on this one.
Mia from commercial remortgages

Most popular


Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date