Again just 2 so far - any ideas for a third? it needs to be distinct from "Slavery" since that justifies a connection of its own when the issue of category/connection overlap is resolved. Some Mauritians might consider Indentured labour a form of slavery but i think it is distinct enough! I guess a slavery related site could fit the bill IF it were significant in the movement of peoples in large numbers.

Statue of Liberty
Aapravasi Ghat

How about Liverpool as a port of mass migration for Europeans to USA? and i think there are many places especially in eastern Europe related with Jewish and German expulsion during WWII such as Zamosc and Warsaw. And also site related with Jewish migration such as Tel Aviv and Jerusalem or even Luxor and Saint Catherine for Biblical Moses.

Thanks Durian.
I think Liverpool is the best immediate choice as the 3rd site for the Connection. As always the UNESCO documentation should be the first port of call (!) to support a proposed connection and I quote from the ICOMOS evaluation
"After the abolition of the transportation of slaves in 1807, ships continued to transport emigrants from Liverpool to America in vast numbers. Many European migrants came through Liverpool because it had the necessary shipping lines, choice of destinations and infrastructure, including special emigration trains".
and, as justification for Criterion iii
"Liverpool was a highly successful general cargo port, for both import and export, and a major European port of trans-Atlantic emigration".

It fits nicely with the Statue of Liberty at the opposite side of the Atlantic!

I will leave someone else to identify/justify the credentials for Jewish migration sites.

Does forced migration count?, even when its not slavery. Auschwitz Birkenau would fit forced migration: of the Jews to this camp. Also if forced migration counts, then the Jews were expelled from Jerusalem at the time of the Babylonians. to keep on the theme of Forced Jewish Migration, the edict that expelled the Jews from Spain was signed in the Alhambra.

It all depends how we/Els frame the "rules" - we could include whatever seems worthwhile/reasonable!

By "migration" I had intended mass movements of peoples "permanently" (insofar as anything is permanent!) to new lands - the journey to Auschwitz was unfortunately very different of course and Auschwitz is already connected as a prison. We don't (yet??) have a connection for places of execution - The Place de la Bastille and Tower of London would make a triplet but, if it is only just going to repeat the majority of the "prison" Connection, it wouldn't be worth having.

Many/most migrations were to a degree "forced" (if only force majeure) I guess (Irish migration due to the Potato Famine?). I find the Alhambra Decree Connection interesting and value-adding to what we know about the Alhambra leading as it did to the dispersal of Jews across the Maghreb, NL/UK and elsewhere and would accept it.

Perhaps I am not being logical or don't know enough about it but the Jerusalem Connection seems less compelling to me. As I understand it only a part of the community was expelled and some/many later returned. We need Assif's view as well?!

Was there a specific location for expulsion of the Mariscos from Spain?

Could Ravenna be considered the natural end of the migration of the Ostrogoths? The inscribed site is certainly "Gothic".

I wonder whether we wouldn't need to limit a Connection such as this to sites involved in the actual "process of migration" - otherwise we could finish up just listing the world's colonial sites as being created as a result of migration! (modern and historic)

I am not quite sure where that leaves my earlier "enthusiasm" for the Alhambra suggestion - I guess the process commences with a "prime cause".

does lope-okanda count? evidence of human migration there was used as a point to support its inscription. considering this might be tricky, since many african sites particularly in the rift valley might also be included, although the evidence there dates back to millions of years ago to the migration of human ancestors...

I've placed this connection, including Lopé-Okanda as the element of mass migration is clearly stated in the ICOMOS evaluation; and the Alhambra one.

Would like to get more evidence / background story on the Jerusalem proposal.

It is true most Jewish population of Jerusalem was expelled by the Babilonians but still I don't know if that's what is meant by this connection. Could Solivagant clarify exactly what he wants to include under this title?

Hi Assif et al,
I don't claim to have done a "logically complete" analysis. I wanted sites connected to the "activity" of "mass" Migration which led to where peoples are today. The Statue of Liberty, Aapravasi Ghat and Liverpool seemed to fit this concept nicely.
But, as always, new proposals stretch the orginal concept and some of these are "good ideas" and some are perhaps an "idea too far".

We need I think to avoid a situation where every colonial town/city and every place from or to which people have moved at some time during the history of mankind gets included.

But how to frame limits to the concept?

I personally don't see that the Babylonian expulsion of the Jews fits into the same category as the aforementioned 3 sites. I am not really sure about Lopé-Okanda either and even the Alhambra Decree was at the limits of my conception of what was meant.

Should/could we limit it to "modern", "mass" migration? But these 2 terms would still need defining. The Alhambra Decree from late 15C is, I guess, at the limits of "modern". I have also suggested that the emphasis should be on connections to the "activity" of migration rather than the result. i.e. a city "created" as a result of migration would not per se qualify unless there were some significant sites within the inscription related to the activity e.g. The Statue of Liberty. If we take, by comparison, Mexico City I know of nothing there which fits the bill (and indeed Mexico City is "mestizo" in a way which NYC isn't and hasn't really, to my knowledge, been a location which received "mass" migration).

Any other thoughts gratefully received!

The definition (narrow or broad) still feels close to Slavery, in my opinion.
During a period in time, mass migration of people from one country to the other (or should it be from one continent to the other?) took place. The reasons for that migration could lie in poverty (possibly in the form of indentured labour) or it was forced by others (politically, as groups of people were not longer wanted, like in the Alhambra Decree, or economically, as in slavery).
I don't see why the connection should be limited to a certain period (modern), but we could limit it to migration between continents - moving to another continent is a huge step.

just a note: the Statue of liberty isn't actually involved in the process of migration. it is a symbol of migration, as the first thing that immigrants saw when entering the U.S.: but wasn't actually involved in the process. Ellis Island was were the immigrants actually had their papers checked.

on Jerusalem: i guess it wouldn't work to count every city that ever had people expelled from it. there would be too many.

Of course but it was still a part of the "process" as it marked the arrival in the New World to those who had arrived and acted as a symbol of hope and a stimulus for those who were thinking of going!

yup, ellis island is where all the processing of documents took place for migrants. actually, the island is part of a protected area, together with liberty island. i'm not sure though if the world heritage site is limited to liberty island though or if it includes ellis.