I pre-ordered this book at Amazon and it arrived just yesterday. Although it was just released it doesn't include the 2009 sites. Still I'm pretty happy to have a book with (almost) all the sites. There are maps and pictures on every page. Check it out.

Ah it actually looks pretty decent. A little better than the last one (Bonneville Connection) that documented them all but was riddled with errors.

For the European based members it is avialable on Amazon UK, which may have cheaper shipping rates.

Or on the UNESCO Publishing Website showing that it is properly official.

Actually if someone is thinking of sourcing from the UK they might do well to shop around beyond Amazon e.g
http://www.abebooks.co.uk/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=1387081421&searchurl=bi%3D0%26bx%3 Doff%26ds%3D30%26kn%3Dworld%2Bheritage%26pn%3Dfirefly%26sortby%3D3%26sts%3Dt%26x%3D39 %26y%3D11

I find UK Amazon is often not the cheapest option for books within UK even when they are giving "free" postage! US Amazon used to be the best option as books are cheaper to start with in USA and then further discounted. So it was often cheaper to buy in US$$ and pay international postage (they ship them all in bulk via Germany anyway) than buy in UK but since they introduced a rather high "standard" international shipping rate from US for all books that is not now the case.

PS SORRY - IGNORE THE ABOVE! Amazon UK IS still slightly cheaper with its free postage in this case if you are buying and having it sent within UK!! (But could still be cheaper if sending to Europe without free postage??)
My own Amazon search had returned this at £20.70 (rather than £14)!!!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_ss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=worl d+heritage+firefly&x=19&y=17

If you were looking for another book to push it up past the £20 'Supersaver' delivery price then I stumbled across this one last night as well.

It is a guide to the World Heritage sites in the British Isles (UK & Republic of Ireland). I will let you know what it is like when they arrive.

I have been meaning to write a few short reviews of the bits in the Resource Library that I have a copy of at home, alas I haven't got around to it yet but will try to get something together in case any one else is interested.

I now have this Firefly book, "World Heritage sites - A complete guide to 878 UNESCO WHS" (it is published by Collins in UK) and have given it a quick perusal. I think it will be a useful addition to my "library" of WHS books but it is not without its faults! A disappointment is the fact that many sites do not have a photo provided of them - in that way the book displays its origins as an "office based" production! I wonder if any of the production/editorial team have actually visited any/many of the sites? The impression given is of a "cut and paste" job of taking photos and text from other sources (especially the photo agency www.shutterstock.com ) without really understanding them. At least this Web site contains "first hand experiences" and "real opinions" - even if one doesn't agree with all of them! Some of the sites lacking a photo really need one - especially where the description appears to be written on the basis that one is looking at what they are describing. And there are the usual pages filled completely with a single picture of a site which adds nothing to what one can see a 1000 times if one makes a single Google search or looks at a National Geographic. Whilst other sites could have really made use of the space so wasted with photos which gave real sense of the place. For some reason Al-Hijr even gets 1.5 pages of photos - perhaps because it was the last site to be reviewed and they had a spare page! The book also relies a great deal on Tito Dupret as a source of photos - www.world-heritage-tour.org (though the book gets their URL wrong by missing out the first hyphen and in fact they have expanded their remit now and call themselves 1001wonders.org !). Perhaps the fact that they have quite long way to go in photographing all WHS is partly a reason for the "gaps"

On first viewing I agree with Meltwaterfalls that this book is less error prone than the Bonneville one - I gave up writing to Els (who was in contact with the editor) pointing out the most crass ones in that book which was a very shoddy piece of work! But there are errors - as it has "UNESCO Publishing" clearly badged as the prime producer it might be of interest to discover and document these! In fact there are no "credits" to any editorial staff by name - the sole attribution of "responsibility" is "Text edited by Collins Geo based on official information made available by UNESCO and its World Heritage Centre". Well, if it came from UNESCO/WHC we must expect a few errors then!

One I have already noted provides an interesting example of how, in this Web Age, errors/mistakes become "viral" and get reproduced until they become accepted as "fact" - Wiki of course is also guilty of this.

I quote from the book re Humberstone and Santa Laura Saltpeter Works ("HSLW"!)
"HSLW contain over 200 former saltpeter works where workers from Chile Peru and Bolivia lived in company towns....."
Funny - that isn't how I understood the site!!
And Els has written in her introduction on this Web site EXACTLY the same phrase (you will have to correct it now Els!)
And the UNESCO Web site introduction also has the same phrase ( http://whc.unesco.org/pg.cfm?cid=31&id_site=1178 ) - That UNESCO page is obviously the prime source of the error which gets repeated by everyone else! Error?? Yes! Self evidently the site doesn't "contain" over 200 works - but only the named/inscribed 2. The AB evaluation gets it right - "Humberstone and Santa Laura works represent over 200 saltpeter works that once existed, where workers, drawn from Chile, Peru and Bolivia.."

are there any more suggestions on great books about world heritage sites? i remember this reader's digest book, strange worlds amazing places with a list of sites in its last pages, marking those which have been proclaimed as world heritage sites. but of course, there were also some errors there. the 1000 wonders of the world, a book translated from german, only features brief description of places--and some of the descriptions are not even noteworthy. i like the discovering the wonders of our world, by reader's digest, containing lots of nifty pictures.

The text fragment originates from the Brief Description on the Unesco website (I should remove it indeed, for more reasons than this one). Did they use all Brief Descriptions to describe all WHS in the book? Or is there also original text?

This "Resource" page http://www.worldheritagesite.org/resources.php
contains a list of books specifically about WHS. It was as reasonably "complete" as was possible using searches on Abebooks, Alibris etc for books with "World Heritage" in keywords or titles (and hence also in English) when done in late 2005 (I think). It is in approximate date of publishing sequence starting with newest.

A couple of new books since which I know of are
The World Heritage by Patrick Bonneville (Collections Bonneville (2006) ISBN 0-9781807-0-4)
pp464. Has the ubiquitous Tito Peret providing the opening remarks as UNESCO wouldn't help apparently - and, given all the errors in the first edition at least, perhaps just as well! Complete up to/including the 2006 inscriptions
Disappearing World by Alonzo C Addison (Collins(2007) ISBN 978-0-00-726118-5) pp 272. Reviews 100 WHS which are "threatened" for various reasons (i.e more than the "offical" list). Must have been "supported" by UNESCO as they got Bandarin to sign the opening remarks!

There is also of course the "craze" over the past few years for "List" books which contain a lot of WHS e.g
501 Must-Visit Destinatations
501 Must-Visit Natural Wonders
501 Must-Visit Cities
There is also 501 Islands which I don't know. I found this series published by Bounty Books around 2006/7 worth having. Unlike the infamous "1000 places to see before you die" it doesn't appear to have been sponsored by upmarket hotels. The "501" series mentions (usually) where sites are WHS (and a reasonably high %age are WHS or on the T List) but doesn't have UNESCO support, doesn't use the logo and isn't fronted by the usual anodyne intro by Matsuura or similar which is the usual "sign" of UNESCO approval.

In response to Els's question above - yes many (most?) of the site descriptions in the book utilise the text from the UNESCO site's "Brief descriptions" - but they also contain additional material usually to around 150 words. The Luther Memorials example is typical -around 2/3rds copied almost verbatim from UNESCO and the final third mentions that the "famous bronze door" is only used "on special occasions". Each site also has a side bar containing "additional information" of 50-100 words and short text of the criteria. But you wouldn't really buy the book for any new information you might obtain. Its main merit is the convenience of a single handbook with map/photo (but not always) and main aspects "ready to hand" . I also quite liked having the sites in "date of inscription" sequence.

Els, if you want you can look into my copy. Í'm usually in Diemen, but every now and then in Vianen. unfortunately not next week (unless some expected meeting takes place there). If you have any plans to come to Diemen, let me know and I'll bring the book with me

Another "lulu" of an error in the Firefly/Collins "World Heritage Sites" book! They have invented a new species of bird.
Under Socotra (page 785) there is a photo of a bird purporting to be a "Socotra Osprey" - in fact it is clearly an Egyptian Vulture. There is no such bird as a "Socotra Osprey".
How can this happen?

Well the photo has been widely syndicated by a guy called Vladimir Melnik (http://www.lightstalkers.org/vladimir-melnik ). His specialism is "Documentary with an arty edge" - herewith an example of his "art" from the Sony World photo awards http://www.ipernity.com/doc/wpa/4332868
If you Google "Socotra Osprey" you will get 120 hits - but, on inspection, ALL of them relate to Mr Melnik's photographic portfolio! Including the photo used in the book http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-5747724-socotra-osprey-on-the-rock.php?id=5747 724&SearchLang=EN

That is how books like this get produced. Back in the editorial office someone who knows nothing about Socotra or birds Googles for photos (looking for a cheap rate no doubt?) for his/her assigned WHS and, voila, this one is chosen and its incorrect title is launched as "fact" into perpetuity. Photos of genuinely important Socotra endemics such as the Sunbird etc which are perfectly available (http://www.birdquest.co.uk/HolidaysbyRegion.cfm?Holiday=792. Note their tour brochure comment about the Egyptian vulture on Socotra "...which, surprisingly, has highest density here of anywhere in the world"), get ignored as not being cheap enough or, in the editor's eyes, not aesthetically pleasing enough for the page/size. Never mind about the "facts".

This is really how it works. I also get e-mails about once a week from all kinds of publishers to use my photos that they've found on the web. The friendly ones send me the magazine or the book where it is used in return.


I'd like to, Joyce. We could meet up in Vianen in a week or 2. I just started working again from the Rotterdam office, after being at home for 2.5 months because of 2 operations (surgery)!

Another "Error" in the World Heritage Sites book which I think raises some points which Forum readers might find of interest! To quote from the book :-

Bryggen
"..is a reminder of the town's importance as part of the trading empire of the powerful North German and Baltic Hanseatic league from the 14th to the mid 16th century. ........ Today Bergen is the only town outside the Hanseatic league whose original structures still remain within the city limits and cityscape!"

This seems a nonsensical and illogical pair of statements. How can Bryggen both have been "part of" the Hanseatic League and also "outside the Hanseatic League"??

In fact the first sentence has been lifted in large part from the introductory page for Bryggen on the UNESCO Web site ( http://whc.unesco.org/pg.cfm?cid=31&id_site=59 ) whilst the second turns out to have been copied verbatim from the 1978 ICOMOS evaluation http://whc.unesco.org/archive/advisory_body_evaluation/059.pdf .

But how can these 2 be reconciled? Well, the ICOMOS evaluation is in 2 languages and the French version states "Ce quartier de constructions traditionelles en bois perpetue, dans son apparence actuelle, le souvenir d'un des plus anciens ports du grand commerce de l'Europe septentrionale , et du seul comptoir exterieur de la Hanse dont les structures primitives restent inscrites dans le parcellaire et le paysage urbain".

Now that does not, in my understanding of French, translate as (perpetuates the memory) "of the only town outside the Hanseatic league whose structures ..." but rather as "of the only overseas trading post of the Hanseatic League whose structures..."

The second sentance would now make sense. The Hanseatic League operated outside "Germany" via overseas offices which enjoyed extra-territorial rights. These were called "Kantors" (hence the use of the French "Comptoir"?) – for a description of how the system operated see the remainder of the ICOMOS evaluation and http://www.stormfront.org/forum/sitemap/index.php/t-339488.html

So – we have a translation error in quite an important document (namely the ICOMOS evaluation), made back in 1978 which has sat uncorrected in the UNESCO archives ever since, being copied unthinkingly and without logical meaning into a book about WHS in 2009!! Thus do errors get perpetuated.

I for one hadn't really appreciated how the Hanseatic League operated – namely the "colonial aspect" by which German traders actually built/lived in the "Kantors". Knowing that, then Bryggen should be added to the "Built/Owned by Germans" Connection. It would appear that none of the other Hanseatic towns outside Germany still have any remains of the Kantor!

It is interesting where "chasing an error" leads!

Yet another "Error"!
The World Heritage site book states
"Three distinct cultural properties stand in the Oaxaca valley: The Historic centre of the city ...; the pre-Hispanic archaeological site of Monte Alban; and the village of Cuilapan where the Dominicans built a vast monastery in the mid-sixteenth century"
There then follows a description of all 3 properties concluding with "The Cuilapan Convent, 10km to the south was founded in 1555, its roofless, open-air church was never finished"

The ICOMOS evaluation of the proposal certainly commences "A single proposal concerning three distinct cultural properties located in the valley of Oaxaca has been submitted." and proceeds to describe all 3 including Cuilapan.

BUT - the editors really should have read to the end of the Evaluation! It clearly states
"ICOMOS is in favor of nominating Monte Alban and Oaxaca to the World Heritage List on the basis of Criteria I, II, III and IV.....These two properties, situated within close proximity of one to the other, are historically complementary. On the other hand, it would appear unnecessarily redundant to include Cuilapan, which is located at some distance from the others, in a nomination to the World Heritage List.".

The UNESCO decision is indeed recorded as covering the first 2 sites and the UNESCO description of the site makes no mention of Cuilapan. Nowhere on any web site or Mexico guide which I have seen is it claimed that Cuilapan is inscribed. And photos of the sign outside the convent show no UNESCO logo which would surely have been present if it were claiming inscription!

But UNESCO isn't totally "in the clear" either! On its Web site it states that the site is situated in the "Etat de Oaxaca de Juarez, municipalites de Oaxaca, Xoxocotlan et Cuilapan"! But UNESCO has "form" on this matter (i.e leaving incorrect location data on its Web site) - the same page for Puebla still claims that site to be in the "Etat de Puebla, municipalites de Puebla, San Pedro Cholula et San Andres Cholula" - when Cholula was also rejected from the original dual proposal made in the same year as that for Oaxaca/Monte Alban (1987). The difference is that the UNESCO decision minutes clearly state that Cholula was not included whereas they make no mention of Cuilapan's exclusion......so just might it have slipped through???? If so at the time (and UNESCO's early documentation is notoriously poor) there is no evidence that UNESCO or Mexico are acknowledging or claiming it.

The Book is available in a number of other languages too, f.e. in Dutch and Spanish. joycevs showed me her copy last week: indeed a good general introduction to all WHS.

Hello,

I was the project leader for this publication so many thanks for everyone's comments. We will do our best to correct any errors that you spot for future editions. We worked closely with UNESCO on this publication and they assisted us with the checking procedure. We also contacted local experts to cover particularly sensitive sites. It is intended to be a nice easy reading reference book. I appreciate that it doesn't tick all the boxes but it was a challenge to get all the sites into one publication. I agree, it would have been good to include a photograph for every site but space prevented us from doing so sadly. We hope to up-date it on a regular basis, improving it wherever we can.

Thanks again for your comments, your feedback is very helpful.

best wishes
Mark