Which holds extra worth: the story of a shipwreck or the treasures it carried? For years, controversy has surrounded the San José, a Spanish galleon loaded with gold, silver and emeralds that sank off Colombia’s coast in 1708. It was destroyed by the British in the course of the Battle of the Spanish Succession, and nearly 600 folks onboard misplaced their lives. The ship’s profitable cargo, meant to fund the struggle, sank greater than 600m to the seabed.
Ever since Colombia introduced the galleon’s discovery in 2015, the San José has turn into one of many world’s most disputed shipwrecks. Controversy lately resurfaced after the oversight group Veeduría Nacional para el Management Social del Patrimonio Cultural Sumergido de Colombia (VNPCS) issued an open letter to Colombia’s lawyer common, complaining of an absence of transparency and alleging looting and unauthorised interventions in 2016 and 2022. The letter additionally claims that the positioning’s co-ordinates, thought of a state secret, have been disclosed.
VNPCS has advocated for the San José since 2017. Initially, its authorized actions sought to halt Colombia’s exploration alliance with Maritime Archaeology Consultants (MAC), the Swiss treasure-hunting agency that helped find the ship in 2015.
“Our claims weren’t resolved in court docket,” Francisco Muñoz Atuesta, the director of VNPCS, tells The Artwork Newspaper. “Nevertheless, they led to the galleon’s designation as a cultural curiosity web site in 2020, banning personal involvement.” MAC is now searching for compensation.
In 2024, the San José was designated a protected archaeological space, inserting it underneath the jurisdiction of the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and Historical past (ICANH). However whereas many celebrated this enhanced safety, Muñoz says earlier issues had been disregarded: “Accusations of looting and unauthorised interventions had been raised in January 2021 through authorized channels, however authorities ignored them.”
These claims are partly based mostly on a 2020 evaluation by Rodrigo Pacheco Ruiz, a deep-sea maritime archaeologist and fellow on the College of Southampton within the UK. Within the examine, Pacheco in contrast partial imagery of the San José from 2015 and 2016.
“Given the scarce info, it’s exhausting to pinpoint the precise causes of sediment variations between the 2015 and 2016 photographs,” he tells The Artwork Newspaper. “They may consequence from human or pure causes, however there are selective areas with sediment elimination.”
Treasure hunt
Through the years, many individuals and entities have laid declare to the San José and its helpful cargo. Essentially the most infamous dispute includes the US-based salvage firm Sea Search Armada, which claims to have situated the galleon within the early Nineteen Eighties and is searching for $10bn, which it claims represents half the cargo’s worth. The battle even reached the Hague’s Everlasting Courtroom of Arbitration.
“There is no such thing as a certainty concerning the authorized course of standing, as it’s at the moment listed as pending,” says Juan Guillermo Martín Rincón, an archaeologist and professor at Universidad del Norte in Barranquilla. He’s additionally a member of a college community that has questioned the Colombian authorities’s plan to lift the shipwreck since 2018.
Martín says that the steep authorized prices are regarding: “The mission has introduced immense monetary price to the Colombian folks. The cargo can now not be shared, but a payout of this magnitude may have an effect on the nation.”
Plans for the San José additionally face scrutiny. Though the galleon’s full excavation was halted, the retrieval performed by underwater robotics of a cannon, a porcelain cup and three cash in November 2025 drew backlash. “No scientific causes got for this extraction, and the gear used was removed from optimum,” Martín says.
“What destroys deep-sea archaeological contexts that aren’t in danger, like this one, is human intervention,” says Pacheco, noting {that a} mission of this magnitude requires worldwide scientific cooperation, which is at the moment absent.
Muñoz fears that the 2025 retrieval altered the positioning. “We demanded that no adjustments be made to the context earlier than it was registered, because it was a criminal offense scene,” he says. “Sadly, now it’s too late.” Muñoz additionally believes the dismissal of images predating 2022 factors to earlier intrusions.
The San José analysis group views the problem in a different way. “The retrieved objects assist decide the positioning’s conservation and degradation by means of physicochemical research,” says Ricardo Borrero, a group member who beforehand opposed the galleon’s full excavation in a broadcast paper. ICANH didn’t reply to requests for remark; the institute has repeatedly denied allegations of looting.
A fraction of rope discovered within the surfaced cannon has additionally sparked debate. Within the open letter, Muñoz describes it as “almost certainly trendy”, whereas Borrero argues that it’s historic. “Different fragments of rope have been present in shipwrecks, together with a Twelfth-century Viking vessel,” Borrero says. He underscores the superb conservation of the ship’s wood components as a result of prevailing situations however stresses that “the seabed is altering and dynamic”.
Consultants query the continued exploration of the ship, with Martín and Pacheco bemoaning the shortage of a long-term, science-based technique. Critics in Colombia additionally cite fears of retaliation however stay dedicated to their trigger.
Authorized resolutions and the mission’s subsequent steps stay to be seen. Everybody The Artwork Newspaper spoke to agrees on one factor: the story of the San José is what makes it helpful, not the treasure it carried.
“The galleon’s heritage is common, and it nonetheless has a lot to inform us,” Muñoz says.
