On Sub-Arch today:
Since there has been so much incorrect information in the press (especially Spanish press) about the Black Swan case and since Peter Hess is not here to eloquently explain what this case is about, let me try to outline some of the facts:
Odyssey discovered the Black Swan “treasure” outside the territorial waters or contiguous zone of any country.
Odyssey VOLUNTARIALLY brought the recovered coins into the jurisdiction of the US Federal Admiralty Court so that anyone with a valid claim to the property could make that claim and the court could decide ownership. In addition to the claim filed by Spain, claims have been filed by descendants of some of the merchants who owned coins transported aboard the Mercedes, and the government of Peru.
There has been NO trial. The merits of the case have not been heard and there has been no cross examination of witnesses or expert testimony. The case at this point is ONLY about whether the US Court has jurisdiction to hear the case. Spain says no and they are claiming sovereign immunity because Spain is certain the Black Swan coins came from the Mercedes and the Mercedes was a naval vessel. Odyssey believes the US Courts DO have jurisdiction to hear the case because 1) the Mercedes was on a commercial mission at the time of her sinking – her gun decks had even been reconfigured to carry additional paying passengers and paid cargo 2) approximately 72% of the coin cargo aboard the Mercedes was NEVER owned by Spain but was owned by private merchants. This has not been disputed by Spain, but Spain has made no statements about giving this private property back to the rightful owners (descendants of the merchants who paid to have their cargo shipped) if they get the coins.
All Odyssey is currently fighting for is an actual trial to determine ownership, and salvage award, if any.
The site is approximately the size of 6 football fields and was covered with “clumps” of silver coins. Odyssey did not have to excavate or disturb a shipwreck to recover the coins (a pre-disturbance photomosaic is available here:
http://www.shipwreck.net/g2/gallery2/v/ShipwreckProjects/black_swan/blackswanpm.jpg.html - all of those spots are clumps of coins. If you are interested in a higher resolution version, please e-mail me off list)
There is no visible sign of any human remains at the site. What is visible on the seabed is what exists archaeologically on the site (the topography and environment of the seabed make it physically impossible for wooden hull sections to be buried beneath sand blankets.) You can access a report about the site – as well as Odyssey’s major legal filings at
http://www.shipwreck.net/blackswanlegal.php The download that has the site report is in Odyssey’s Response to Spain’s motion to Dismiss dated November 17, 2008. Read the Kingsley Affidavit and Report.
It is interesting to note the US State Department’s insertion into this legal case and to wonder about the motivation. Revelations from “Wikileaks” cables prove that a trade in the case was discussed – and although that trade did not happen, others may have been proposed or consummated.
What will happen to the coins if they are sent to Spain? Will there be fighting? Spanish press reports that this has begun. Will they be sold? There were press reports in 2009 that “cash-strapped Spain has ordered its navy to look for huge gold reserves that were lost at sea in the 18th century” because there was enough value there to match the current Spanish budget shortfall.
There is quite a bit of attention from Spain because of the value of this shipwreck, but where was Spain’s desire to focus on underwater cultural heritage when Odyssey (in 2005) offered to conduct archaeological work for free? We offered to conduct work on one or more ancient shipwreck sites (Punic and Roman sites discovered by Odyssey) in the Alboran Sea in conjunction with a Spanish archaeological institution with Odyssey providing $500,000 worth of ship/ROV and technician time and $50,000 in conservation services. ALL artifacts were to remain with the Spanish archaeological institution and the Spanish archaeologist would direct activities on site. If there are no coins involved is Spain not interested?
As to the question: Could this affect “treasure hunting”? I believe the answer is a resounding yes, but in ways you may not have considered. If this case goes against Odyssey, who did thorough documentation of the work on the site and who brought the case to the court in an attempt to have ownership fairly determined, what do you think “treasure hunters” will do in the future when they find a Spanish coin or artifact underwater? Do you think they will report the find or the location? Do you think they will attempt to record any information about the site? Or do you think they will quietly try to sell the coin with no provenance or worse yet, melt it down and take quick cash?
Best regards,
Laura Barton
laura@shipwreck.net
