Scavenging Off the Scavengers.

[sechan19]

The New York Times has a fascinating editorial today that serves as an amusing update to the story I posted last week about the furor over who owns the massive quantities of gold and silver recently resurrected from a Spanish galleon lost at sea two centuries ago. The author, in addition to providing a brief, though comprehensive, history of recent returns of looted treasures - including those by the Getty, Met, and Boston MFA to Italy (which I knew about) and by Italy to Ethiopia and Libya (which I did not know about) - makes the suggestion that the country of Peru act now to stake its claim on the buried treasure. The author's reasoning for this suggestion is the fact that Spain had initially taken this tremendous wealth from Peru, which was a Spanish colony at the time, and that on those grounds Peru is the original owner.

While I doubt that the Peruvians will be chomping at the bit to send their own lawyers to Tampa, the idea itself tickles the hell out of me, and reminds us that "ownership" is a continually pesky issue about which answers will not be easily supplied.

Whose Treasure Is It Really? (NY Times Editorial - Login May Be Required)

Comments

[lordameth.livejournal.com]

I guess to my mind this simply comes down to a question of whether it's "treasure" or "artifacts". Are these objects simply gold, to be sold or melted down for their value, or are they historical objects, to be collected and appreciated?

You reply to my comments on the previous post are quite on the nose. I agree completely.

Thanks for posting this stuff. I don't know how I continue to miss the headlines on NYTimes.com.