This page groups sacred sites by whether UNESCO has formally recognized them. Wikipedia notes elsewhere that cultural traditions can be "recognized by UNESCO as Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity," the same kind of international listing that applies to World Heritage sites. Browsing by UNESCO status lets a visitor see which sacred sites carry that international recognition and which do not.
Facts
Overview
What Defines This GroupingGeoglyphs of the southern Peruvian coast: lines, trapezoids and animal figures made by clearing the dark desert surface to expose the paler ground beneath. They appear to have been made to be walked and to be bound up with water and its sources; their purpose is inferred from their form, their siting and the pottery smashed on them, not from any text. 2 Contested Use
Contested or Appropriated Modern UseThe claim that the lines were made for or by visitors from space, popularised from 1968, has no archaeological standing and was answered in detail by the excavators. The atlas records it as a modern claim made about the site, and keeps it separate from what the archaeology supports. 2 Attestation
Era of AttestationThe geoglyphs are dated by the ceramics deposited on them and by excavation of the lines themselves to roughly the last centuries BCE through the seventh century CE, with some figures earlier than the main group and some later. 2 Learn More
Sacred Sites of the Nazca
This small group gathers a sacred site of the Nazca culture of the southern coast of ancient Peru, known above all for the vast geoglyphs, the Nazca Lines, traced across the desert, whose ritual or astronomical purpose is still debated.
The browser will find the site the atlas classes here. The entry describes what is known of its significance, distinguishing archaeological understanding from popular speculation.
UNESCO World Heritage Status
Sources
1. Divinity Atlas Directory Taxonomy, First Edition Category Tree
2. The Nasca
Divinity Atlas Directory Prose, First Edition Category Descriptions
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.