|1978||Inscribed||Reasons for inscription|Laura Barber (USA):
We spent time in quito on both ends of a trip to the Galapagos. It was a beautiful city surrounded by mountains and churches! The people were extremely friendly and we spent time walking throughout the city. We visited the Bascilica and climbed the tower to the top where we could see the volcano in one direction and the statue of the virgin in the other direction. The Plaza of Independence was centrally located and a gathering place for the citizens. Over by the San Francisco plaza was a wonderful art store with locally made souvenirs. The streets are narrow and very hilly...reminding me od San Francisco in California. The climate was great and while the altitude was bothersome to some people; I didn't notice it. It was a very specail visit and added a great deal to our Galapagos trip.
Date posted: November 2011 Jorge Giraldo (USA):
Quito, probably the most fantastic "big town" in South America. The complex of the San Francisco church-square-convent is probably the most impresive urban complex you can see in that part of the world. When you are on top of the "atrium" of the church in a normal saturday morning,wich is an open marketplace, wish its design is based of Bramante's ideas,you realize so many thinks about the the Spaniards, the "Criollos" and the "Indios".
the church-convent-atrium are located in the highest part of the squeare, and it is the most important landmark in the city. From the atrium you can see the Company church, wish is probably the most refined church in America.
Be prepare for the food. It just exquisite, and be prepare to walk around the historic area. Do not hesitate to get into the churches, convents and even houses.
You will love it
Date posted: May 2008 Paul Tanner (UK):
Quito got in on the “WHS act” as early as 1978 when it was 1 of the first 12 sites inscribed (I have seen it claimed that it was in fact the very first site inscribed – this may be the case but the evaluation document on the UNESCO Web site gives it a reference number of “2” which, in the original, has been manually changed from “1” whilst Galapagos is still numbered “1 bis”). It is interesting to look at the rather “thin” Advisory Body Evaluation and compare this document with the bureaucratic statements which intending sites must now have produced about them by ICOMOS . 10 years later Lima joined the party but, by that time it had to be more specific and is entered just as the “Historic Centre of Lima” whereas Quito is inscribed apparently in its entirety as the “City of Quito”!
But perhaps this difference is not just a matter of changes in UNESCO policy – there is no doubt that Quito has maintained the atmosphere of a “colonial city” far more than Lima. Or rather - it “had” done so. My 2 visits were in 1973 and 1992 respectively and the city had developed considerably during those 19 years let alone the next 13 – I remember particularly that the airport which was previously “out in the country” had been gobbled up by the suburbs.
I assume from reading about the city however that, despite developments around the edge, increases in traffic and no doubt some office blocks in the centre Quito has managed to maintain what was an extremely pleasant colonial centre. Indeed if its inscription as early as 1978 has meant anything then it must have done so!
I remember it particularly for its wonderful setting nestled among green mountains and for the number of colonial buildings, plazas, churches and narrow cobbled streets. The climate was pleasant and the air was clear and fresh and a short bus ride away you could see snow capped volcanoes and sit astride the Equator. Maybe the air is a little less “fresh” now! The other Andean country capitals from Caracas round to Santiago, pleasant as some of them are, do not begin to match it.
Date posted: June 2005
Have you been to City of Quito? Share your experiences!