Posted on 12/30/2024 10:16:38 PM PST by nickcarraway
In before Spain claims it...
We know that there are 250 ships that hold treasures, and sooner or later, a construction project or something similar will discover it. Regardless, there is no contingency plan to protect these findings,” he said.
Easily 1.5 billion dollars just on the metals value. Probably much more as artifacts to sell to people. There is no sane argument beyond feminine emotion to think it should remain on the ocean floor if it could be found.
No government should be able to lay claim to something lost in a wreck 400 years ago. I know they do, but it’s pure greed and power... which they accuse treasure hunters of.
Can you claim it on the basis of who the ship belonged to? I thought it was only on the basis of whose territorial waters it was in?
Are wen claiming we shouldn’t recover?
I knew I had dropped 22 tons of gold somewhere...
“Money Heist”
More AI-written crap-worded unreadable junk. Is there a real article that contains more and better information?
Maritime treasure law is a true snakepit. Countries claim it if the ship flew their flag, even hundreds of years ago no matter where the wreck is located. Then it’s always possible that some insurance company paid out back then and then THEY make a claim. Countries go to court against each other, insurance companies join in, and there are treaties that come into play. It’s supposed to be a real mess.
The one with the least rights always seems to be the person who finds the claim and wants to salvage it. At best they are offered a pittance, even though they are the only ones doing the slightest work to actually locate and recover the treasure.
And then of course the museums and archeologists who operate only on emotion, and want it to remain unrecovered, or given to them so they can put it in a box and hide it away like Indiana Jones Ark in the Box.
I bet Travis McGee would know a heck of a lot more about this topic. I’ll ping him.
Does that sound reasonable? Were cargo ships being built in less than a month's time, continuously for 550 years? That's some serious manpower and material procurement. And that's just for the ones that sunk in the regions around Portugal?
I'm skeptical. Not saying it's impossible, but just that it sounds excessive by a considerable factor.
I think the numbers of sunken ships is reasonable. In the age of sail wooden ships were much smaller than freighters today. A typical Spanish galleon was 100-150 feet (30-45 m) in length and 40-50 feet (12-15 m) wide (the preferred ratio was 3:1 or 4:1). If you have smaller ships you have to have more of them to move cargo.
Also sailing ships depended on the wind to move and often the wind, even without a storm, would remorselessly drive these ships onto rocky shores to break up and sink despite all efforts of the sailors. Sailors called shores where conditions were likely to drive their ship onto the land a lee shore.
A lee shore, sometimes also called a leeward (/ˈljuːərd/ shore, or more commonly /ˈliːwərd/), is a nautical term to describe a stretch of shoreline that is to the lee side of a vessel—meaning the wind is blowing towards land. Its opposite, the shore on the windward side of the vessel, is called the weather or windward shore (/ˈwɪnərd/ or, more commonly, /ˈwɪndwərd/).
Because of the danger of being driven aground on a lee shore it is essential seamanship to treat one with caution. This is particularly the case with sailing vessels, but a lee shore is an issue for powered vessels as well.
dayglored has a point, the math seems to not add up and I question it too. But to support your argument also I think there is another factor. I’m sure they were not all treasure ships. I’m sure the bulk of them were large daily fishing vessels labeled as ships. And there were a LOT of those... They were probably built in many locations simultaneously dozen or more a month.
Back then at lot of songs and poems were written about sailors going to sea and never returning. So I’m thinking it was pretty common. Sailing was a risky business and every time they went out they said their last goodbyes in case they never returned because it was so common.
Every trip out it was a really big deal when a ship actually returned back to port. With that said I wonder how many viking ships are on the floor between Scandinavia, Iceland, Greenland, and in the North Sea? Fishing vessels included bet there are several thousand at least. The North Sea is brutal...
That’s what I thought...However, in international waters, all bets are off
Thank you. As a Gen Xer it is excruciating to read the AI garbage that passes for “journalism” these days.
Mel Fisher would agree with that.
Over 8,000 ships sunk? No wonder their forests were depleted. Takes a lot of timber to make a sturdy ship, and a lot of waste also.
“And then of course the museums and archeologists who operate only on emotion, and want it to remain unrecovered, or given to them so they can put it in a box and hide it away”
I may have this wrong, but I seem to recall reading that the guy who found the Edmund Fitzgerald worked hard to have access to the wreck site restricted so he could somehow benefit.
I have that book here somewhere but it’s been 30 years since I read/last saw it.
Last I read...if it’s a warship it belongs to that government. If it’s a private/commercial ship it’s finders-keepers....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.