Take advantage of the search to browse through the World Heritage Centre information.

Administration
Budget
Capacity Building
Communication
Community
Conservation
Credibility of the World Heritage ...
Inscriptions on the World Heritage ...
International Assistance
List of World Heritage in Danger
Operational Guidelines
Outstanding Universal Value
Partnerships
Periodic Reporting
Reinforced Monitoring
Reports
Tentative Lists
Working methods and tools
World Heritage Convention








2024 47 COM
2023 24 GA
2023 46 COM
2022 17 EXT.COM
2022 45 COM
2021 16 EXT.COM
2021 23 GA
2021 44 COM
2021 15 EXT.COM
2020 14 EXT.COM
2019 13 EXT.COM
2019 22 GA
2019 43 COM
2018 42 COM
2017 12 EXT.COM
2017 21 GA
2017 41 COM
2016 40 COM
2015 11 EXT.COM
2015 20 GA
2015 39 COM
2014 1 EXT.GA
2014 38 COM
2013 19 GA
2013 37 COM
2012 36 COM
2011 10 EXT.COM
2011 18 GA
2011 35 COM
2010 34 COM
2010 9 EXT.COM
2009 17 GA
2009 33 COM
2008 32 COM
2007 16 GA
2007 8 EXT.COM
2007 31 COM
2006 30 COM
2005 15 GA
2005 29 COM
2005 29 BUR
2004 7 EXT.COM
2004 7 EXT.BUR
2004 28 COM
2004 28 BUR
2003 14 GA
2003 27 COM
2003 27 BUR
2003 6 EXT.COM
2002 26 COM
2002 26 BUR
2001 25 COM
2001 25 EXT.BUR
2001 5 EXT.COM
2001 13 GA
2001 25 BUR
2000 24 COM
2000 24 EXT.BUR
2000 24 BUR(SPE)
2000 24 BUR
1999 23 COM
1999 23 EXT.BUR
1999 4 EXT.COM
1999 12 GA
1999 3 EXT.COM
1999 23 BUR
1998 22 COM
1998 22 EXT.BUR
1998 22 BUR
1997 21 COM
1997 21 EXT.BUR
1997 2 EXT.COM
1997 11 GA
1997 21 BUR
1996 20 COM
1996 20 EXT.BUR
1996 20 BUR
1995 19 COM
1995 19 EXT.BUR
1995 10 GA
1995 19 BUR
1994 18 COM
1994 18 EXT.BUR
1994 18 BUR
1993 17 COM
1993 17 EXT.BUR
1993 9 GA
1993 17 BUR
1992 16 COM
1992 16 BUR
1991 15 COM
1991 8 GA
1991 15 BUR
1990 14 COM
1990 14 BUR
1989 13 COM
1989 7 GA
1989 13 BUR
1988 12 COM
1988 12 BUR
1987 11 COM
1987 6 GA
1987 11 BUR
1986 10 COM
1986 10 BUR
1985 9 COM
1985 5 GA
1985 9 BUR
1984 8 COM
1984 8 BUR
1983 7 COM
1983 4 GA
1983 7 BUR
1982 6 COM
1982 6 BUR
1981 5 COM
1981 1 EXT.COM
1981 5 BUR
1980 3 GA
1980 4 COM
1980 4 BUR
1979 3 COM
1979 3 BUR
1979 2 BUR
1978 2 GA
1978 2 COM
1978 1 BUR
1977 1 COM
1976 1 GA

Decision 32 COM 8B.44
Examination of nomination of natural, mixed and cultural proprerties to the World Heritage List - Protective Town of San Miguel and the Sanctuary of Jesús Nazareno de Atotonilco (MEXICO)

The World Heritage Committee,

1. Having examined Documents WHC-08/32.COM/8B and WHC-08/32.COM/INF.8B1,

2. Inscribes the Protective Town of San Miguel and the Sanctuary of Jesús Nazareno de Atotonilco, Mexico, on the World Heritage List on the basis of criteria (ii) and (iv);

3. Adopts the following Statement of Outstanding Universal Value:

San Miguel de Allende is an early example of a rational territorial and urban development in the Americas, related to the protection of one of the main Spanish inland roads. The town flourished in the 18th century with the construction of significant religious and civil architecture, which exhibits the evolution of different trends and styles, from Baroque to late 19th century Neo-Gothic. Urban mansions are exceptionally large and rich for a medium-size Latin American town and constitute an example of the transition from Baroque to Neo-Classic. The Sanctuary of Atotonilco is a remarkable architectural complex that illustrates a specific response, inspired by the doctrine of Saint Ignacio de Loyola. Its interior decoration, especially mural painting, makes the Sanctuary a masterpiece of Mexican Baroque. Both the town and the Sanctuary, intimately linked, played a significant role in the process of Mexican independence, with impacts throughout Latin America.

Criterion (ii): San Miguel de Allende constitutes an exceptional example of the interchange of human values; due to its location and functions, the town acted as a melting pot where Spaniards, Creoles and Amerindians exchanged cultural influences, something reflected in the tangible and intangible heritage. The Sanctuary of Jesús Nazareno de Atotonilco constitutes an exceptional example of the cultural exchange between European and Latin American cultures; the architectural disposition and interior decoration testify to the interpretation and adaptation of the doctrine of Saint Ignacio de Loyola to this specific regional context.

Criterion (iv): San Miguel de Allende is an exceptional example of the integration of different architectural trends and styles on the basis of a 16th century urban layout. Religious and civil architecture exhibit the evolution of different styles, well integrated into a homogeneous urban landscape. Urban mansions are exceptionally large and rich for a medium-size Latin American town. The Sanctuary of Atotonilco is an outstanding example of a specific religious settlement, containing exceptional decoration that makes it a masterpiece of Mexican Baroque.

The required conditions of integrity and authenticity have been met; both the town and Sanctuary have been subject to few significant alterations over time, urban changes have been adapted to the town's features and scale, and restoration works have been carried out according to appropriate theoretical and technical principles.

The legal system in place ensures the adequate protection of the property and the town and the Sanctuary exhibit an acceptable state of conservation. Management policies, structures and plans in place are adequate to ensure the preservation of the property's values, integrity and authenticity.

4. Recommends that, in order to ensure the optimisation of the current protection, conservation and management system for the property, the State Party should consider the following:

  • a) local authorities should be encouraged to continue the analysis and policy development for tourism management. This should include studies of carrying capacity of the most remarkable historic areas, urban spaces and buildings. The State Party is invited to report on the progress of the study and the results of its implementation;
  • b) local authorities should be encouraged to continue to work on and implement the proposed study on traffic control and planning in the historic centre of San Miguel and adjacent areas. The State Party is invited to report on the progress of the plan and on its results and impact;
  • c) the State Party should consider the possibility that the whole buffer zone of San Miguel be given federal protection;
  • d) the local government is encouraged to create a management agency or group that, with the participation of different stakeholders, can oversee the common implementation of the partial plans for San Miguel and the Sanctuary of Atotonilco;
  • e) the local government should define and implement a systematic monitoring programme that allows better measurement of the state of conservation of the properties over time, and identify priorities for conservation actions;
  • f) the State Party should continue with the plan to rehabilitate the village of Atotonilco, in order to improve the setting of the Sanctuary of Jesús Nazareno. The local government is encouraged to continue studies and the implementation of the project to re-establish the historic road linking San Miguel with Atotonilco.
Decision Code
32 COM 8B.44
Themes
Inscriptions on the World Heritage List
States Parties 1
Year
2008
Documents
WHC-08/32.COM/24rev
Decisions Adopted at the 32nd Session of the World Heritage Committee (Quebec City, 2008)
Context of Decision
WHC-08/32.COM/8B
WHC-08/32.COM/8B.Add
WHC-08/32.COM/8B.Corr
WHC-08/32.COM/INF.8B1
WHC-08/32.COM/INF.8B1.Add
WHC-08/32.COM/INF.8B1.Add2
top