wondering whether someone could check out whether the same is true of the following T sites:
To start with just one of these. Cajamarca is NOT included in Qapac Nan.
The furthest north section in Peru ( "Sección Escalerilla/Casa Blanca-Cerro Huaylillas /Cushuro (PE-HH-59/CS-2011) ") starts well SE of Cajamarca.
The same therefore also applies to Chan Chan - that far north NO coastal road is inscribed
Also, using this "quick logic" method, Nazca is also of no relevance to the Qapac Nan nomination since the ONLY coastal section in Peru is PE-XP-40/S-2011 in the form of a side road down to Pachacamac.
I have also been following up on the assignment of Pizarro as a "Connection" for Qapac Nan. Now there can surely be NO question but that he did see the Qapac Nan - but where?? Els has chosen a quote from the Nom File as follows "Through San Marcos and Yamobamba one arrives at the town of Baños, where the Inca Atahualpa was when Francisco Pizarro arrived with his soldiers in November 1532 and from there it is a short distance to Cajamarca, the city where both met in an unequal battle".
But this is just one of many references to Pizarro in the Nom File and doesn't relate specifically to a nominated location!!
I found the quote in the file on page 773 of the PDF as part of the Nom File titled "2.b.1 General Historic overview" which runs from pages 685 - 828. This seems to cover every bit of the area including roads which may or may not a part of the Qapac Nan and many of which are certainly NOT inscribed! It is followed by another chapter from pages 829-936 titled "History of the Qapac Nan" which seems to go over much the same ground!!
As stated above this quote can't be relevant to any section of the inscribed sections of the Qapac Nan which might be associated with Pizarro.
I think that with the Qapac Nan we are going to have to be very careful to associate connections with specific nominated sections including Ref Numbers -even if the maps themselves are very difficult to follow - assuming your computer will load them and you zoom in close enough to read them then - even if a place IS shown on a map it and highlighted with a circle/square etc it may still not actually be an inscribed part marked by a different coloured icon
PS. The questions of Samiapata and Incallajta can also be quickly resolved - the inscribed Qapac Nan only contains 4 sections in Bolivia. All of these are on the Altiplano route between Desaguadero and La Paz and the most southerly finishes just short of El Alto above La Paz. Samaipata well to the ESE in Santa Cruz plays no part in any of them. Similarly with Incallajta which is situated on the way to Samaipata also in Santa Cruz province