Hacker News Reader

Comment by BbzzbB | Hacker News Reader

>Spain insists that the bounty is theirs since it was aboard a Spanish ship

This quote is making my head spin, what a damn bold statement from a modern democracy.

"Yeah you know how our ancestors enslaved, murdered and plundered your natives? Well, we're calling dibs on that bounty, after all conquistadors dropped it as they were heading home."

Granted, the article doesn't establish who exactly is "Spain".

View on HN

>>Spain insists that the bounty is theirs since it was aboard a Spanish ship

>This quote is making my head spin

It's one step up from "Finders...Keepers". It was in our possession last, so therefore it is still ours (shh, don't worry about how we got it or who we took it from).

I mean that's how the UK has still its museums filled to the brim with foreign objects. I dont support Spain on its claims but it is the same logic. This should go to Colombia, period, the treasure is in their waters.

Atleast UK can hide behind status quo. This is of next level.

That's standard practice for shipwrecks. I believe it's part of maritime law, but don't quote me one that.

Thanks, I did wonder as I was typing my comment if it's par for the course. Do you know of recent examples where historical empires/colonizers (basically France, UK, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands or Belgium, do I forget someone?) claimed shipwrecks of locally plundered loot? Granted, it wouldn't make me agree with the position morally even if it's not unusual.

Some Spaniard art or other cultural heritage on board sounds reasonable, but the obviously plundered bounty irks me.

Pretty much always, I think. The Black Swan Treasure is an interesting case. Peru, the US salvage company, and Spain all made cases for the treasure. It was found off the coast of Gibraltar, and Spain doesn't really agree with their borders/sovereignty. There were also allegedly some shenanigans involving the US State Department offering to facilitate the return of the treasure to Spain if Spain helped return a painting that had previously been stolen by Nazis.

There were not "shenanigans", US doctrine is that the shipwreck belongs to the original country that fleet the ship.

I would consider the implied quid pro quo to be the "shenanigans"

Much of the population of hispanic America are descendants of both natives and conquistadors.

Plus the black african slaves brought by the conquistadores.

A truly mixed area. This mix gave way to a second generation of "mestizos", "zambos" and "mulatos". I imagine those words are problematic now, but that's what I was taught in school in south america

Hmm, that get really fun when applied to modern day. Let's say some country invades and loots other one. Then sinks a ship carrying loot. Now they reclaim the loot from ship wreck. Is the loot fully theirs now?

If you win the war, you get the loot. That's what winning a war means. If you lose, you were the bad guys and need to hand it back plus maybe some other war reparations.

I would say sure let them have it and then make them pay all the stolen hundreds of billions back

Reply on news.ycombinator.com