Which holds more value: the story of a shipwreck or the treasures it carried? For years, controversy has surrounded the San Jos\u00e9, a Spanish galleon loaded with gold, silver and emeralds that sank off Colombia’s coast in 1708. It was destroyed by the British during the War of the Spanish Succession, and almost 600 people onboard lost their lives. The ship\u2019s lucrative cargo, meant to fund the war, sank more than 600m to the seabed.<\/p>\n
Ever since Colombia announced the galleon\u2019s discovery in 2015, the San Jos\u00e9 has become one of the world\u2019s most disputed shipwrecks<\/a>. Controversy recently resurfaced after the oversight group Veedur\u00eda Nacional para el Control Social del Patrimonio Cultural Sumergido de Colombia (VNPCS) issued an open letter<\/a> to Colombia\u2019s attorney general, complaining of a lack of transparency and alleging looting and unauthorised interventions in 2016 and 2022. The letter also claims that the site\u2019s co-ordinates, considered a state secret, have been disclosed.<\/p>\n VNPCS has advocated for the San Jos\u00e9 since 2017. Initially, its legal actions sought to halt Colombia’s exploration alliance with Maritime Archaeology Consultants (MAC), the Swiss treasure-hunting firm that helped locate the ship in 2015.<\/p>\n \u201cOur claims were not resolved in court,” Francisco Mu\u00f1oz Atuesta, the director of VNPCS, tells The Art Newspaper. “However, they led to the galleon\u2019s designation as a cultural interest site in 2020, banning private involvement.\u201d MAC is now seeking compensation.<\/p>\n In 2024, the San Jos\u00e9 was designated a protected archaeological area<\/a>, placing it under the jurisdiction of the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and History (ICANH). But while many celebrated this enhanced protection, Mu\u00f1oz says previous problems were disregarded: \u201cAccusations of looting and unauthorised interventions were raised in January 2021 via legal channels, but authorities ignored them.\u201d<\/p>\n These claims are partly based on a 2020 analysis<\/a> by Rodrigo Pacheco Ruiz, a deep-sea maritime archaeologist and fellow at the University of Southampton in the UK. In the study, Pacheco compared partial imagery of the San Jos\u00e9 from 2015 and 2016.<\/p>\n \u201cGiven the scarce information, it is hard to pinpoint the exact causes of sediment differences between the 2015 and 2016 images,\u201d he tells The Art Newspaper. \u201cThey could result from human or natural causes, but there are selective areas with sediment removal.\u201d<\/p>\n Treasure hunt<\/p>\n Over the years, many people and entities have laid claim to the San Jos\u00e9 and its valuable cargo. The most notorious dispute involves the US-based salvage company Sea Search Armada<\/a>, which claims to have located the galleon in the early 1980s and is seeking $10bn, which it claims represents half the cargo\u2019s value. The conflict even reached the Hague\u2019s Permanent Court of Arbitration<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is no certainty regarding the legal process status, as it is currently listed as pending,\u201d says Juan Guillermo Mart\u00edn Rinc\u00f3n, an archaeologist and professor at Universidad del Norte in Barranquilla. He is also a member of a university network that has questioned the Colombian government\u2019s plan to raise the shipwreck since 2018.<\/p>\n Mart\u00edn says that the steep legal costs are concerning: \u201cThe project has brought immense financial cost to the Colombian people. The cargo can no longer be shared, yet a payout of this magnitude could affect the country.\u201d<\/p>\n Plans for the San Jos\u00e9 also face scrutiny. Although the galleon\u2019s full excavation was halted<\/a>, the retrieval conducted by underwater robotics of a cannon, a porcelain cup and three coins in November 2025<\/a> drew backlash. \u201cNo scientific reasons were given for this extraction, and the equipment used was far from optimal,\u201d Mart\u00edn says.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat destroys deep-sea archaeological contexts that are not at risk, like this one, is human intervention,\u201d says Pacheco, noting that a project of this magnitude requires international scientific cooperation, which is currently absent.<\/p>\n Mu\u00f1oz fears that the 2025 retrieval altered the site. \u201cWe demanded that no changes be made to the context before it was registered, as it was a crime scene,\u201d he says. \u201cSadly, now it is too late.\u201d Mu\u00f1oz also believes the dismissal of imagery predating 2022 points to previous intrusions.<\/p>\n