Greetings,
Lamar wrote:
Dear blindbowman;
And this is where you are wrong, my misinformed friend. I DO have a claim to the alledged treasure trove of Tayopa, as much as you or anybody else has. If there is in a fact a treasure, then it's historical impact will far exceed it's current monetary value, no matter how little or how much that may be.
The treasures in question have a history of great depth and therefore it belongs to everybody, not just the person who finds it. I feel that if the treasure is in uncovered, then it should be imediately seized by the US government, willingly if possible, forcibly if not and a paltry, token sum paid to the lucky finder.
Afterwards the treasure should become a part of the Smithsonian Museum for all to view. It's only a shallow minded, selfish individual who would horde such a find of incredible historic value for themself.
Your friend;
LAMAR
Glad to see your views are so utterly altruistic, in that you apparently allow no reimbursement to the costs, time, and risks taken by the "lucky finder" whatsoever, and have Tayopa seized by the US government, even though we are talking about Mexico. Or perhaps I misread your post, do you think that such treasure, if found, should be taken by the US government regardless of where it is found, and that the "lucky finder" should receive only a "token sum" for his efforts, or do you hold that the "lucky finder" should be recompensed for all of his/her time, expenses, and the very real risks involved?
Your post has a bit of the "sour grapes" taint to it, so that if you cannot have the treasures of Tayopa, then no one should. Can you show where the US, Mexican or Spanish government(s) have collectively or individually financed, equipped, organized and executed ANY search whatsoever for the treasures of Tayopa? Governments rarely spend the time and resources required to locate lost treasures, they would rather sit back and wait for someone else to spend their money, their time even their lives in the search, so the government can then step in and seize the treasure thus recovered - treasure that would have simply rotted away into the basic elements of nature if left to any government agency to recover. In some countries, the treasure may well be taken by the government, but in that case the finders are rewarded with a monetary award equal to the value of the treasure discovered (example UK). I have no problems with that sort of system, which ENCOURAGES treasure hunters to seek out and recover the lost treasures of the past, rather than simply allow them to be dissolved into the soils.
Historical treasure is a very aetherical thing, and gold bars have no more value as historical items than signed papers. Only to a collector does such an item gain more value than its boullion value. So you can sure be free to call me personally "shallow minded and selfish" for I would no sooner surrender any such treasure to any government agent without being rewarded for my efforts and expense, and the reward must be fair and equal in value to that treasure found and recovered before any government agent has any fair claim on it to remove it from my possession, assuming I were so lucky as to have found it.
Seizing a treasure "forcibly" as you suggest Lamar, smacks very much of the old authoritarian types of governments, the monarchies and dictatorships which have proven to be very poor models of government over time. Suppose that in attempting to seize a found treasure, the government ended up having to wound or even KILL the person(s) who had found it, would that be justified in your view Lamar? What if the finder defended himself against the government aggressions, and he/she either wounded or killed one of the agents trying to seize the treasure? I respectfully disagree with your views Lamar in whole and whole-heartedly, and can point to such incidents which HAVE occurred in the recent past; your idea is a very poor one indeed. It has been done, in places such as Turkey, Greece, Italy, and Ecuador and many others - what treasure is worth killing for? Unless of course you feel that it is fully justified that blood should be spilled to seize any treasure from a finder, including the possibility of deaths?
Without the potential for financial reward, virtually no one will expend any effort in attempting to find and retrieve anything lost in the past - or perhaps you, Lamar, would much prefer if that were the case, so that no individual or group that was NOT an authorized agent of the government, could legally do any search for any kind of treasures? Perhaps you believe that metal detectors themselves ought to be outlawed, so that there would be less risk of anyone ever finding a lost treasure? Is it far better for lost treasures of the past to remain in the soils and seas, slowly dissolving into the elements and most to remain LOST FOREVER? I would appreciate if you could enlighten me further with your views.
I have serious doubts about the wisdom of bestowing anything whatsoever to the Smithsonian Institute, considering they already have their display areas filled and their basements and warehouses are overflowing with artifacts that as a result are NEVER shown to the public.
If you intend on donating any found treasures to a museum, I would sooner see it go to the local museum in the region where it is found than to be shipped to some large museum which is already overloaded with relics and artifacts to the point that they sell off many donated items just to be rid of them.
Good luck and good hunting to you all, I hope you find the treasures that you seek - even if you would prefer that those treasures never get found!
your friend,
Oroblanco
