Gold from legendary 1708 shipwreck is seen in new images
Dubbed the "holy grail" of shipwrecks, the San Jose galleon was sunk by the British navy near Cartagena in 1708, killing most of the roughly 600 crewmembers on board. The ship was believed to be holding gold, silver, gemstones and other treasure worth billions of dollars.
Now researchers have analyzed intricately designed gold coins found near the wreck, confirming they are indeed from the iconic San Jose. The coins feature depictions of castles, lions and crosses on the front and the "Crowned Pillars of Hercules" above ocean waves on the back, according to a new study published Tuesday in the journal Antiquity.
Researchers, including experts from Colombia's navy, studied images taken by remotely operated vehicles of dozens of coins that are scattered around the shipwreck nearly 2,000 feet below the ocean's surface. The study's authors said the exact number of coins on the seabed is difficult to determine "due to the dynamic nature of the site." But an analysis of high-resolution images from the remotely operated vehicles shows each coin's average diameter is 32.5 millimeters and weighs roughly 27 grams.
On some of the coins, researchers were able to discern the letters "PVA" — representing a Latin motto meaning "Plus Ultra" or "Further Beyond." That adage was used on currency to signify the expansion of the Spanish monarchy in the Atlantic, the study's authors said. Numbers depicting the coins' denomination and the date of minting (1707) could also be seen.
Last August, Colombian authorities said one remotely operated vehicle surveyed the wreck, uncovering numerous artifacts, including an anchor, jugs and glass bottles.
The Colombian government announced last year it would begin extractions from the ship off its Caribbean coast, using multiple remotely operated vehicles. The ship was discovered in 2015, but its exact location has been kept secret to protect the storied wreck from potential treasure hunters.
Since its discovery, multiple parties have laid claim to the shipwreck, including Colombia, Spain and Indigenous Qhara Qhara Bolivians who claim the treasures on board were stolen from them. The wreck has also been claimed by U.S.-based salvage company Sea Search Armada, which says it first discovered the wreck more than 40 years ago.
The cause of the San Jose's sinking has also been debated. British documents indicate that the ship did not explode, according to Colombia's government, but Spanish reports suggest the ship was blown up in battle.
Either way, the ship — laden with chests of emeralds and about 200 tons of gold — sank with most of its crew while heading back from the New World to Spain on June 7, 1708.
In May 2024, Colombia declared the site of the shipwreck a "protected archeological area."
An accused woman skips her pedicure, kills her ex-husband
LAPD chief speaks out about deployment of military forces to anti-ICE protests
Sneak peek: The Day My Mother Vanished
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Prince William & Harry's Inheritance Details Revealed After Reports Nobody Knows ‘How Much Longer' King Charles Has Left to Live
The truth about the British royal family is that, no matter how much people want things to stay the way they are, they can't. Particularly under the current circumstances. The King is sick, so plans for succession need to be made. His illness has also likely precipitated his reconciliation with his youngest son, Prince Harry, which seems to be coming together. And Prince William will inherit the throne, likely sooner or later. But details about what each of King Charles' sons will inherit outside of the obvious are scarce. And one of those inheritance questions has to do with Princess Diana's childhood home, the Althorp estate in Northamptonshire. The late Princess spent some of her childhood holidays there before moving in permanently into the home at 14. More from StyleCaster Harry & Meghan's Ex-Staffer All But Confirmed Rumors They're Moving Back to the UK Amid Claims William Won't 'Welcome Them Back' King Charles Suffers Devastating Setback Amid Reports No One Knows 'How Much Longer' He Has Left to Live Related: Who inherited what from Princess Diana? Almost as importantly, the estate is Princess Diana's final resting place. She was buried in the grounds of the residence at her brother's request. Her grave is located on a small island nicknamed 'The Oval,' in the center of an artificial lake on the estate. Her burial place is not accessible to guests or any member of the public. Considering all of this, is Prince William or Prince Harry getting the estate when King Charles dies? The answer is no. The estate, where Princess Diana grew up with her two older sisters, Lady Sarah and Lady Jane Spencer, and her brother Charles Spencer, belongs to the Spencer family and would not be part of any inheritance from King Charles. It was passed down to Charles Spencer, Princess Diana's brother, and his son, Louis Spencer, Viscount Althorp, will one day inherit it. That, of course, doesn't mean Prince William and Prince Harry's inheritance isn't expected to be large. But what that inheritance is and when it will come is, of course, still in flux. Recent events, however, have made the question much more prevalent. There is the BBC interview Prince Harry gave, in which he said, 'There's no point in continuing to fight anymore. Life is precious. I don't know how much longer my father has. He won't speak to me because of this security stuff. But it would be nice to reconcile.' Then there's the fact that a few months ago, a source told News Nation Now that King Charles' health is in decline. 'Charles is indeed a sick man, and he does have cancer,' the source said. 'He also refused chemotherapy and decided on a less invasive treatment. While Harry and his dad aren't speaking, Harry would be aware of all of this via back channels.' Since then, the two sides have taken the first step towards reconciliation. King Charles and Prince Harry's senior aides held a secret meeting, considered the first big step towards resolving the feud between father and son. 'There's a long road ahead, but a channel of communication is now open for the first time in years,' said a source. That, couples with recent reports that Prince Harry reportedly invited his family to the next Invictus Games, which are set to be held in the UK in 2027 and reports that the King had factored not only Prince Harry but Meghan Markle and their two children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, into the heart of his funeral plans, paint a good picture for the future of the family. What that means for any inheritance, we will have to wait until the time comes to find out. Best of StyleCaster The 26 Best Romantic Comedies to Watch if You Want to Know What Love Feels Like These 'Bachelor' Secrets & Rules Prove What Happens Behind the Scenes Is So Much Juicier BTS's 7 Members Were Discovered in the Most Unconventional Ways Solve the daily Crossword
Miami Herald
2 hours ago
- Miami Herald
British tourist ignores landslide signs, then needs rescue in Italy, officials say
A British hiker ignored warning signs after a landslide and then called for a dangerous rescue in the Italian Alps, officials say. A landslide in July on Croda Marcora closed the Berti Via Ferrata trail from both access points in northeastern Italy, and rocks continued to fall, according to a July 31 Facebook post from alpine rescue group Soccorso Alpino e Speleologico Veneto. The trail was closed after two Belgium hikers were rescued on July 19, officials said, and other hikers attempting the trail found it dangerous. Signs marked the closed trail, but on July 31, a 60-year-old tourist from the United Kingdom passed the signs and set out on the trail, according to the post. By that afternoon, the man called the rescue group and said rocks were falling from higher up on the mountain and that he needed rescue, officials said. He was told to shelter in place while the mountain was shrouded in clouds until rescuers could get a clear view from above, according to the post. The first helicopter, Falco 2, was able to get in the air and find his exact location before it was rerouted to another emergency, rescue officials said. A second helicopter, Leone, confirmed the hiker was in the middle of the landslide zone at about 7,900 feet and just two hours after the initial call, a rescue team pulled the hiker to safety, according to the post. The hiker's problems, however, didn't end there, Italian emergency services told The Telegraph. The man was fined 14,000 euros, or about $16,000, by the rescue services for ignoring what they said were clearly marked signs, both in Italian and English, according to The Telegraph. Photos of signage posted on Facebook show phrases like 'Warning!' and 'trail closed,' as well as 'stay safe, do not go beyond this warning.' The massive fine comes because the hiker was 'in a place where they shouldn't be' and they were 'unharmed with no health issue' when he needed the rescue, a national rescue service official told The Telegraph. The fee is also higher for the British national since the United Kingdom left the European Union, and would have been smaller for an Italian climber, according to the outlet. Officials said they added more signs, including additional signs in German, on the closed trail, The Telegraph reports. Chat GPT, an AI chatbot, was used to translate the Facebook post from the Soccorso Alpino e Speleologico Veneto.
Atlantic
a day ago
- Atlantic
Washington's Quiet Work
In August 1775, nothing particularly dramatic was happening among the roughly 14,000 soldiers of the Continental Army besieging the British army in Boston. Indeed, nothing particularly dramatic happened for the next six months. And then, in March 1776, the British suddenly evacuated Boston. Which is why the months of apparent calm deserve a close look. The semiquincentennial of American independence has begun: The anniversaries of the battles of Lexington and Concord and Bunker Hill are behind us; the reenactment of Ethan Allen's Green Mountain Boys' storming Fort Ticonderoga was a smashing success. Other big moments await, culminating, no doubt, in a big party on July 4, 2026. One hopes and expects that there will be plenty of hoopla, because that is the American way. But 250 years ago today, the real and unspectacular work of American independence was under way. The Continental Army, created in June of 1775, had warily welcomed its new leader, George Washington, without much fuss. A slaveholding Virginia gentleman and loosely religious Anglican was going to lead an army that was mainly made up of New Englanders—including both psalm-singing, Bible-quoting descendants of the Puritans and dissenting freethinkers. For his part, Washington was appalled at what he saw: militia units that elected their own officers and called them by their first names, free Black men carrying weapons, money-grubbing Yankees (as opposed to land-grubbing Virginia gentry), and general squalor. 'They are an exceeding dirty and nasty people,' he told his cousin Lund Washington. Lindsay Chervinsky: The 'dirty and nasty people' who became Americans What happened that summer outside Boston was of monumental importance. If this was to be an American army and not just an assembly of colonial militias, then Washington would have to be the first American general, and not just a provincial. He would have to create a system out of chaos, and hold together a force against a dangerous enemy. Although slightly outnumbered and bottled up in Boston, which connected to the mainland by only the narrowest of peninsulas, the British army was tough, cohesive, professional, and eager to avenge its unexpected defeats and Pyrrhic victories. Washington did the work in many ways—by organizing the army in divisions and brigades, inspecting the troops, regularizing discipline, hammering home the importance of digging latrines, and quarantining soldiers who had smallpox. It helped that he looked the part of a military leader: tall, well turned out, graceful, and the best horseman in the colonies, by most accounts. No less important, he was able to transcend his aversion to those strange New Englanders. Two men utterly unlike his social set in Virginia quickly became his most trusted subordinates: Nathanael Greene of Rhode Island, a Quaker with a talent for organization, and a tubby Boston bookstore owner, Henry Knox, who became the chief of artillery. The former was eventually made quartermaster of the army and then commander of the southern army, where he displayed a flair for field command. The latter brought 59 heavy-artillery pieces from Crown Point and Fort Ticonderoga to the army outside of Boston in the dead of winter, before developing the artillery arm into the equal of its British opponent. Washington quickly realized that his most talented military leader was a third New Englander, the Connecticut merchant Benedict Arnold, who, until he committed treason, was the best field commander on either side of the conflict. In the autumn of 1775, Washington sent him off on a daring march through the Maine wilderness that very nearly wrested Quebec from British control. The commander in chief needed a headquarters guard—what we today call a personal security detail—and so in March 1776, the army created a unit known as the life guard. Washington selected men from each army unit, which meant that the life guard's personnel skewed in favor of New Englanders; as its first commander, he chose a Massachusetts man, Caleb Gibbs, who lasted until 1780. He chose southerners, too, for crucial positions, and not all of them gentlemen—Daniel Morgan of Virginia, for example, was a roughneck leader of riflemen who formed an elite corps. The point was clear: This was an American army, and talented men, no matter their background, could win their leader's trust and rise up the ranks. Washington remains in some ways the most remote of America's national heroes; he is more distant from us than Abraham Lincoln because of his greater austerity and reserve. He mastered his volcanic temper; prudently handled both his subordinates and his superiors; and knew the value of dignity and a certain distance in exercising command. He was brave but not particularly gifted as a tactical leader, and he was prone to devising overly aggressive and complicated plans, but these did not matter as much as the larger leadership qualities that he had brought with him to Boston. Small wonder that many years later, men who were his intellectual superiors—Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams—worked for him. His story shows why character and good judgment are far more important in a leader than mere intelligence. Despite wonderful writing about Washington in recent books, including Ron Chernow's 2010 biography and the first two volumes of Rick Atkinson's trilogy on the history of the Revolution, Americans do not value him as we once did. The fault lies across the political spectrum. For some (think of the 1619 Project), the fundamental sin of slavery overwhelms every aspect of biography. Washington controlled several hundred enslaved people on his Mount Vernon estate; he often treated them badly, and as of 1775, he felt no shame about that. Being a plantation owner was part of his identity, but not all of it, and more important: Like some of the other Founders, he became uneasy about reconciling the ideals of the Revolution with the practice of holding men and women as chattel—which is why he manumitted all of his slaves in his will. At a deeper level, this view of American history cannot help but crush patriotic pride in what remains, in retrospect, an astounding achievement. The Revolution culminated not in despotism but in a new political order based on liberty and self-government, built on ideals that, described with exceptional eloquence by another slaveholder, Jefferson, eventually blew up the evil institution on which their way of life rested. George Packer: A view of American history that leads to one conclusion A different form of relentless present-mindedness afflicts the current administration, which seeks to purge national parks and museums of references to the darker sides of American history, beginning with slavery but also including the slaughter and dispossession of American Indians, and various forms of discrimination and persecution thereafter. In everything from signage to artwork, the Trump administration reaches for pabulum and kitsch, a false and unidimensional depiction of the American past. As for academic historians, although some exemplary ones are at work—including Gordon Wood and David Hackett Fischer—the contemporary trend is to shun great individuals in favor of subaltern history. There is not much place for a commanding general in a pantheon composed of people overlooked by previous generations. That summer and fall in Cambridge and the other towns surrounding Boston, George Washington's work made a difference. It reminds us that American independence was won by dramatic deeds, to be sure, but also by mastering—slowly and painfully—the undramatic things, such as insisting on rank insignia and saluting, managing gunpowder production, and digging latrines properly. It reminds us that there is such a thing as individual greatness, and that it can make all the difference. And particularly in an age of self-righteous scorn, we would do well to recall how Washington's lifelong struggles with himself—his prejudices, his emotions, his upbringing and background—contributed to final victory. We can still profit by the example.
