Well, with the inscription of this site Mexico has really outdone France both in getting places inscribed twice (5 here are already on the list - Mexico City, Queretaro, San Miguel, Guanajuato and Zacatecas!) and in creating an inscription which encompasses so much of the country. No wonder ICOMOS had some “problems” with the nomination and wanted it referred for, among other matters, re-consideration of “the inclusion of the five already inscribed World Heritage properties”.

That said it contains many of Mexico’s great colonial sites – but I wonder how many of the additional sites are really worthwhile and to what extent they are riding on the coat-tails of the overall concept. We have really only visited the southern part. My photo taken in 2008 is of a sign “advertising” the Camino Real taken in the, already WHS inscribed, city of Zacatecas (about a third of the way up!)

The real driver behind the nomination (and various web sites show that it has been a 10 year project) seems to have come from the state/city of Durango – which happens to be celebrating its bicentenary this year. As Durango proudly proclaims “10 States are included in the project (but) Durango has 16 sites (more than any other)” - The full list is given as “Chihuahua has five, 16 Durango, 5 Zacatecas, 2 Aguascalientes, 3 Jalisco, 3 San Luis Potosi, 4 Guanajuato, 3 Queretaro and two state of Mexico” –yes I know this is only 9 states but I quote accurately – possibly the Centro Federal is the 10th! Durango’s list includes several haciendas, missions, churches towns and mines – as well as the city of Durango itself. So, to make a full assessment of the site, I guess it is necessary to visit its northern parts and make one’s own decision about the ICOMOS request that Mexico “Further justify the selection of sites that make up the nomination to clearly define how they contribute to conveying the outstanding universal value of the property”. Another peculiarity about the inscription is that, although the Camino Real went from Mexico City to Santa Fe, and indeed its northern finishing point is an important part of its historical significance, none of those parts within the US state of New Mexico is included. The loss of these historic parts of their country is of course still a raw subject in Mexico which regards the US annexation of much of its territory after the Mexican-American War of 1846-8 as little short of theft! The US does “look after” its part of the route and proclaimed the “404 mile (646 kilometer) section of the route within the United States …. as a National Historic Trail on October 13, 2000”. But there seems to have been no consideration of joining with Mexico when the US was considering its new T List a couple of years back, and, unusually, ICOMOS didn’t raise the issue in its conclusion, though normally it identifies trans-boundary possibilities at every opportunity!!