Towards a Sacred City Network: On sacred sites, cities, and connectivity metrics

Towards a Sacred City Network: On sacred sites, cities, andconnectivity metrics

Overview

Ever since the publication of the earliest seminal pieces on

world cities (Friedmann and Wolff 1982; Friedmann 1986), a

central focus has been placed on economic criteria as standards

for measuring both the ‘world-cityness’ of a city and its

relational empirics with other cities, or the networks it is part

of. Perhaps, Friedmann, Wolff and Sassen’s (1991) influence is

that far-reaching. Alternatively, economic and financial data

have been both accurate and ubiquitous. Scholars like Taylor

(2003, 2004, 2007, 2011) have employed data on both the quantity

and size of headquarters of the world’s most prominent advanced

service producers to measure a city’s nodal significance in world

city networks as these headquarters serve as ‘command and

control’ entities in a globalizing world.

Broadly, a very notable absentee in measures of world-

cityness is culture. As Pratt suggests, work on world cities has

only implicitly considered culture as it has been rendered

invisible and/or improperly dichotomized contra the “real deal:”

the economic, centered on the “empirical focus on the ‘power of

finance’” (2012, 265). Yet, as he points out, the ‘cultural

1

economy’ is one of the fastest growing segments of urban

economies and global cities (Pratt 2012, 266), and as such

deserves scholarly attention.

Specifically, a key element of culture heavily eschewed by

literature on world cities is religion, or, in more geographical

terms, sacred sites and places. The need to integrate what I call

sacred cities to the lexicon of world cities and world city

networks is warranted for a couple of reasons. First, world city

studies have expanded over the past decade or so to accommodate

work on airline networks (Grubesic and Matisziw 2012), spatial

Internet networks (Malecki 2012), media centers (Watson and

Hoyler 2011), and world cities of sex (Hubbard 2012), among many.

This reflects the discipline’s adaptability to more recent and

pressing phenomena. At the same time, these pieces make use of a

key characteristic cities possess: relationality. A city’s raison

d’être lies in its connections, or “external relations,” for it

never operates on its own (Taylor 2004, 2-3). In the simplest of

terms, then, why not come up with a sacred city network, too?

Second, religiously motivated travel, despite prognostications of

religion’s demise in a secularizing world, occupies an important

2

segment of international tourism, growing substantially in recent

years (Olsen and Timothy 2006, 1). Religiously motivated travel,

including pilgrimage to sacred places, has experienced an upsurge

in the last 50 years (Olsen and Timothy 2006, 3).

The dual reasoning above propels the questions this piece

seeks to engage with. What are sacred cities? What makes cities

sacred? How would the depth and commercial airline connectivity

of a sacred city network compare with that of a world city

airline network? Theoretical frameworks on identity formation and

place-making, as well as network analysis, are needed to answer

these queries.

The piece proceeds in four parts. First, I discuss the

work’s methods, which consist of both qualitative and

quantitative techniques. Of note here is the differentiation and

subsequent link I make between sacred sites, sacred cities, and

the airports serving these cities. Second, I expound on the

notion of a sacred city in two ways. The first is through the use

of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Organization criteria in classifying World Heritage sites. This

list is arguably the most definitive source of sacred sites, and

3

its criteria for collating these sites are straightforward. The

second, more importantly, is by way of an appraisal of the

literature on the relationship between cities and sacred places,

which implicates notions of identity-formation, faith, and

attachment to physical structures making up sacred cities. Third,

I present a model of a sacred city network, based on selection

criteria from the UNESCO World Heritage List and the resultant

links between sites, cities, and airports presented in the first

part. In coming up with the sacred city network, I replicate the

methods employed by Grubesic and Matisziw (2012) in constructing

a world city network based on commercial airline connectivity.

The final part is a brief discussion on the results of the two

preceding analyses, as well as potential research trajectories.

Methods

The piece makes use of two distinct yet interrelated

methods. Its interpretive component delves into sacred sites, and

their relationship with cities, which I term ‘sacred,’ and the

commercial airports catering to them. The second component

entails the creation of a sacred city network based on 1) the

interpretive portion cited; and 2) a preceding study on

4

commercial airline linkages between world cities (Grubesic and

Matisziw 2012). Both of these are explicated in greater detail

below.

A plausible starting point for conceptualizing sacred sites

is the UNESCO World Heritage List, which I used to create a list

of sacred sites. It contains 1,007 sites across six continents

“to encourage the identification, protection and preservation of

cultural and natural heritage around the world considered to be

of outstanding value to humanity” (UNESCO 2014). A set of 10

criteria – six cultural and four natural – is used to gauge the

viability of a potential heritage site as brought to the

attention of a committee tasked to act on nominations by

countries that have signed the World Heritage Convention. A site

included in the list could satisfy more than one criterion, and

fulfillment of each criterion is detailed and made public.

Notwithstanding the fact that none of the criteria make

mention of the terms ‘religious,’ ‘sacred,’ or ‘faith,’ it was

still reasonable to come up with a working and operational

starting point for sacred sites. Specifically, after appraising

5

the criteria, I operationalized sacred sites as fulfilling

criteria ii and iv or criteria ii and vi. Likewise acceptable was

the categorization of a site under criteria ii, iv, and vi. Other

selection criteria for this piece are as follows:

1. Site must be cultural. Natural and mixedcultural/natural sites are not considered.

2. Sites fulfilling either criteria ii and iv or ii and viare included in the final count; sites standing aloneas exclusively under ii, iv, or vi, as well as thosefalling under iv and vi, are eliminated from theanalysis.

3. Sites occupying more than one state are not counted,with the exception of the Vatican City state.

4. Sites inscribed on the List of World Heritage in Dangerare excluded from the final count.

5. Sites found in numerous locations in a single countryare assigned to that country’s busiest commercialairport.

The significance of employing these combinations to

ascertain sacred sites is elaborated in the next section of the

paper because they are also essential in defining a sacred site,

but for now it is worth quoting each of the three criteria as

laid out by UNESCO, and offering a cursory explanation as to why

these contribute to a more lucid understanding of what a sacred

site is.

6

Criteria ii: “to exhibit an important interchange of humanvalues, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, ondevelopments in architecture or technology, monumentalarts, town-planning or landscape design;”

Criteria iv: “to be an outstanding example of a type ofbuilding, architectural or technological ensemble orlandscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history;”

Criteria vi: to be directly or tangibly associated with events or livingtraditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literaryworks of outstanding universal significance. (TheCommittee considers that this criterion shouldpreferably be used in conjunction with othercriteria);” (UNESCO 2014; emphasis mine)

Key terms in the criteria that are highlighted shed initial

insight into a sacred site. Equally important is how these

descriptions shaped and influenced the literature appraised to

further concretize notions of sacred sites and sacred cities –

the other half of the interpretive methodology deployed to

develop a clear operationalization of sacred sites and sacred

cities. These narratives of sacredness are crucial to arriving at

a more cogent interpretation and understanding of what is really

meant by the term ‘sacred city,’ particularly if it is introduced

to the lexicon of broad disciplines like Political Science and

Sociology, and more specific sub-fields such as world city

network analysis.

7

Sites falling under the combination of the stated criteria

may at first glance spark debate over their sacredness. For

example, it would be logical to assume that Moscow’s Kremlin is

more symbolic of the tyrannical despotism of Soviet rule rather

than sacredness. This is where the importance of an interpretive

and descriptive narrative of sacred cities, to be elaborated on

in the next section, comes into play. Having these narratives,

for instance, opens up the nuances of the Kremlin. For starters,

Cathedral Square, made up of three of the most important places

of worship in the Russian Orthodox Church, is within the confines

of the Kremlin. Many of the sites under criteria ii and iv or ii

and vi possess such nuances that interpretive and descriptive

literatures on sacredness and sacred cities make known.

The second part of the methodology is the creation of a

sacred city network. Once the criteria for selecting heritage

sites had been set, the entire list provided by UNESCO was

inspected. Each site was then assigned to the nearest commercial

airport, and the city that airport was located in. For instance,

the Catalan Romanesque Churches of the Vall de Boí in the town of

Vall de Boí, Spain are near Barcelona in the Catalunya region.

8

This site, or group of sites, then, is classified as being part

of Barcelona, which in turn is the sacred city in the sacred city

network analysis. The corresponding commercial airport, then, is

the Barcelona-El Prat Airport. However, this does not denigrate

Vall de Boí’s status as a sacred city, much in the same way that

Jeddah is the sacred city in the sacred city network for the

purposes of network analysis because its airport serves Mecca,

the sacred city in this example. In effect, bigger cities such as

Barcelona or London containing commercial airports could be seen

as larger groupings of sacred towns and cities. However, some of

these larger cities, like Rome and Istanbul, are themselves

considered sacred as well. In short, there are two ways to view

sacred cities in the sacred city network. First, some cities are

larger groupings of sacred towns and sites, and serve these

through their transportation hubs, commercial airports. Second,

other cities in the network are themselves sacred. Care and

attention to detail must be observed when examining the cities

comprising the sacred city network. Appendix A lists all UNESCO

World Heritage sites fulfilling the criteria for sacred sites,

where these sites are located [the sacred city], and the nearest

9

commercial airport serving the city. This helps clarify where the

heritage site, or sacred site, is actually located geographically

– the sacred city, in other words.

Data on commercial airport passenger traffic from the

Airports Council International’s 2009 World Airport Traffic

Report1 were then obtained to generate a list of the 50 busiest

airports serving sacred cities, leading to the creation of a

sacred city network. Network connectivity was measured through

the number of direct flights each sacred city had with one

another, a replication of the methods employed by Grubesic and

Matisziw (2012), who produced a world city network of commercial

airline connectivities using the world’s 50 largest advanced

service producer cities. The two city networks were then compared

to assess the depth and breadth of the sacred city network

relative to its more established, finance-based world city

counterpart.

What follows are discussions on both the conceptualization

of sacred cities, observations from a nascent sacred city

1 The 2009 report was the most recent, free-to-access ACI publication online. Later versions require a substantial purchase price.

10

network, and how it fares in terms of connectivity vis-à-vis

Grubesic and Matisziw’s world city network.

Conceptualizing sacred cities

UNESCO World Heritage List criteria ii, iv, and vi, when

used in conjunction with one another, offer a foundational

glimpse into sacred cities. The sacred sites that make up sacred

cities are places where exchanges of values, ideas, and beliefs

have occurred over extended periods of time. Furthermore, they

are physical structures that evoke significant epochs in human

history, as well as living and dynamic traditions. Yet, the

UNESCO criteria must also be used in conjunction with descriptive

and narratives about the lived experiences in sacred sites and

sacred cities since they only indirectly address ‘sacredness’

while failing to bridge the sacred site with the sacred city.

Sheldrake implicitly builds on these accounts by relating

thinking about a sacred place to cities (2007, 244).

From a planning perspective, Sheldrake critiques Modernist

plans, which are in his words ‘Platonist’ insofar as separating

the intellect from the emotional, sensuous, and material (2007,

254). Instead, he proposes a capitulation to an Aristotelian

11

‘phronesis,’ or “knowledge born of intuition, imagination,

emotional engagement, and desire” (ibid.). These would be

manifested in urban designs that speak to us about the “condition

of the world” while inspiring both reverence and awe: reverence

towards a sense of God and a more diffuse sense of the numinous,

and awe at buildings and spaces continually granting access to an

reinforcing the value of people rather than the social standing

of economic and social elites (Sheldrake 2007, 252). Sacred

structures, ranging from ornate structures and roadside shrines

to remote gravesites and tranquil monasteries, “celebrate the

sacred, inspire awe, and evoke reverence” (Mazumdar and Mazumdar

2004, 389). Likewise, they foster communal bonds that reaffirm a

commitment to both the community and faith life (Mazumdar and

Mazumdar 2004, 389-90).

This perspective facilitates an appreciation of the initial

meaning of sacredness attached to UNESCO Heritage sites covered

by criteria ii and iv or criteria ii and vi. Sites such as the

Canterbury Cathedral in Canterbury, United Kingdom, the historic

areas of Istanbul, Turkey, and Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes

in the Kii Mountain Range in Kii Peninsula, Japan evoke both the

12

awe and reference Sheldrake posits. At the same time, these sites

are public and do not restrict entry and, in the process, advance

only the interests of elites and the powerful in society. While

some sites in the list charge entrance fees, like museums

adjacent to churches in the Historic Centre of Warsaw in Poland,

they are not exorbitant and used mostly for the upkeep of the

buildings. In line with this, the salience of religion persists

even in large, metropolitan capitalist urban centers such as

London, which is still dotted with medieval churches while being

nestled in the changing physical landscape surrounding it (Hill

2011, 370).

Perhaps the greatest challenge in operationalizing a sacred

city is the personal and private meaning individuals attach to

sacred sites and places. Outside of ‘obvious’ cities religions

have invested sacred characteristics onto, such as Mecca, Rome

and the Vatican, Jerusalem, Amritsar, and Varanasi2, it would be

legitimate to ask, “How do I know a sacred city when I see one?”

The interplay between personal, spiritual convictions, sacred

2 Interestingly, the latter two cities are not part of the UNESCO World Heritage List,while Jerusalem has been on the List of World Heritage in Danger since 1982, and isthus excluded from this study’s analysis.

13

sites, and the towns or cities they are located in provides an

answer to the ‘know one-see one’ query, and various scholars have

attempted to substantiate this interplay.

An individual’s spiritual attachment to place begins through

early religious socialization by parents, educators, and peers in

the larger community of believers (Mazumdar and Mazumdar 2004,

390). This is sustained through place ritual, place artifacts,

place stories, hymns, and myths; and place experience (Mazumdar

and Mazumdar 2004, 390-94). One’s religious identity, then,

becomes rooted in a place. The simultaneous relationship between

place and identity is reliant on a reciprocal meaningfulness

binding people and places in accord with their religious affinity

(Bremer 2006, 33).

A sacred place, then, relies on “discourses of particular

religious traditions” (Bremer 2006, 30). Sacred sites will endure

long after individual religious adherents have passed away as

they are perceived to have an air of permanency functioning as a

key metonym of the salience of the religious (Hill 2011, 370)

while also transcending human mortality (Bremer 2006, 30). Sacred

cities, then, retain many, if not all, of these characteristics,

14

whether as dynamic containers of places of worship with numerous

sites of religious significance, or as, paraphrasing Friedmann’s

famous line, ‘basing points’ where shared values, beliefs, and

identities interact and intersect.

A nascent sacred city network

City networks, whether on the basis of advanced service

producers, headquarters of diplomatic missions, or non-

governmental organizations, among many others, are relational

empirics that reveal connectivities between cities. The second

task of this paper is to create a network of sacred cities, and

examine the depth of this network and how accessible each city is

to one another. Also, because this is a nascent network that has

yet to be extensively taken up by existing literatures, it is

important to compare it with a more prominent network in

scholarly work – world city airline networks. This sub-section 1)

briefly discusses the work of Grubesic and Matisziw (2012), whose

methods are replicated here; 2) reveals the results of the survey

of UNESCO World Heritage sites; and 3) presents the sacred city

network and compares it with Grubesic and Matisziw’s analysis of

the world city airline network.

15

World city airline network

Using data gathered jointly by consulting firm A.T. Kearney

and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Grubesic and Matisziw

listed the top 50 cities in the 2008 Global Cities Index

(Grubesic and Matisziw 2012, 101; see Table 1).

Table 1: The 2008 Global Cities Index1. New York 26. Zurich2. London 27. Abu Dhabi3. Paris 28. Istanbul4. Tokyo 29. Boston5. Hong Kong 30. Rome6. Los Angeles 31. São Paulo7. Singapore 32. Miami8. Chicago 33. Buenos Aires9. Seoul 34. Taipei10. Toronto 35. Munich11. Washington 36. Copenhagen12. Beijing 37. Atlanta13. Brussels 38. Cairo14. Madrid 39. Milan15. San Francisco 40. Kuala Lumpur16. Sydney 41. New Delhi17. Berlin 42. Tel Aviv18. Vienna 43. Bogota19. Moscow 44. Dublin20. Shanghai 45. Osaka21. Frankfurt 46. Manila22. Bangkok 47. Rio de Janeiro23. Amsterdam 48. Jakarta24. Stockholm 49. Mumbai25. Mexico City 50. JohannesburgReproduced from Grubesic and Matisziw 2012, 101

16

The authors then measured world city interactions through

the number of direct flights connecting each of the 50 cities

with one another. Among the metrics they used were nodal degree,

or the number of direct connections each world city has with its

peers in the population of cities (Grubesic and Matisziw 2012,

104-07), and D-matrix, which is a summation of the maximum

possible number of direct connections from one city to all others

and the number of missing direct connections in the network.

Since there are 50 cities in the analysis network, 49 steps would

be involved in moving from one city to all others, if direct

connections are exclusively the only connections between them

(Grubesic and Matisziw 2012, 107). The smaller the D-Matrix

value, the more efficiently connected the city is to the network

as the value incorporates the number of missing direct

connections to cities within the network. Table 2 is reproduced

and illustrates the cities with a degree of node >=30.

Table 2: Degree of node (>=30) for world citiesCity Degree of node D-matrix

1. Paris 46 522. Frankfurt 44 543. Amsterdam 42 564. London 41 575. New York 40 58

17

6. Zurich 37 61T7. Rome 35 63T7. Munich 36 639. Milan 34 64T10. Moscow 33 65T10. Bangkok 33 65T10. Tokyo 33 6513. Chicago 32 66T14. Toronto 31 67T14. Madrid 31 67T14. Vienna 31 67T17. Hong Kong 30 68T17. Beijing 30 68T17. Seoul 30 68Reproduced and edited from Grubesic and Matisziw 2012, 107

The data show that Paris is the most well connected city in

the network with 46 direct linkages out of a possible 49 [only

Manila, Sydney, and Jakarta are not directly connected to the

French capital] (Grubesic and Matisziw 2012, 104, 107).

Similarly, the D-matrix is derived from the nodal degree. Because

Paris is connected to all but three cities, its D-value is 52 (49

+ 3). The same holds for the other cities in the network.

Frankfurt’s nodal degree indicates it has 44 direct connections

out of a possible 49 cities in the population. Because it does

not have direct linkages with five cities [49-44 = 5], its D-

value is 54 [49+5].

18

Degree of node and the D-matrix depict the extensiveness of

a group of cities in a given network. In the case of the world

city airline network, the breadth of the network is impressive as

it encompasses all six inhabited continents [see Table 1].

Likewise, its depth is remarkable as 19 cities have at least 30

direct connections with one another. These metrics are also used

in the consideration of a nascent sacred city network.

UNESCO Heritage List’s sacred sites and cities

Out of the 1,007 UNESCO World Heritage sites, 311, or 30.8

percent, fell under criteria ii and iv or ii and vi. Notable

exclusions to this figure include sites in the List of World

Heritage in Danger3 that satisfy these criteria, such as the Old

City of Jerusalem and its Walls, Timbuktu, Medieval Monuments in

Kosovo, and the Ancient City of Damascus. Sites not in danger but

also failing to meet the criteria designated for sacred cities

include Petra, Historic Cairo, the Old City of Dubrovnik, and

Notre-Dame Cathedral in Reims, France, among others. It is not

within the parameters of this paper to speculate the reasons

behind their differing categorizations as decided on by UNESCO,

3 The 46 sites in the List of World Heritage in Danger are included in the total countof 1,007 UNESCO World Heritage sites.

19

but these sites illustrate one limitation of this exercise.

Specifically, not all sites and cities with a legitimate claim at

sacredness are included in the analysis.

Each heritage site was then paired with a commercial airport

servicing it. The foremost criterion for assigning an airport to

a heritage site was distance or proximity. However, some of the

most proximate airports to heritage sites do not operate

regularly scheduled commercial flights, are used only by

chartered planes or serve as military airfields. Hence, the next

criterion was the busiest commercial airport within the province,

region, or politico-administrative subdivision above the town or

city. This seems logical as visitors tend to fly into the largest

airports within reasonable proximity to the site they wish to

visit. All heritage sites, then, have a one-to-one correspondence

with a commercial airport and the city or town in which the

airport is located.

The 2009 Airports Council International World Airport

Traffic contains data on the total number of passengers an

airport has served for that calendar year. All in all, the ACI

report had passenger data for 1,336 airports around the world.

20

From the top of the rankings, the 50 busiest airports in terms of

passengers served that corresponded to a World Heritage site. The

cities these airports are geographically located in comprise the

sacred city network, and are collated in Table 3 along with the

total number of passengers they served in 2009.

Table 3: Cities in the sacred city network and no. of passengersserved by their primary airports

City Totalpassengers

City Totalpassengers

1. London(Heathrow)

66,037,578 26. Stockholm(ARN)

16,098,571

2. Beijing 65,372,012 27. Jeddah 15,996,7703. Paris (CDG) 57,906,866 28. Hangzhou 14,944,7164. Frankfurt 50,932,840 29. Berlin

(Tegel)14,180,237

5. Madrid 48,250,784 30. Osaka(Kansai)

13,448,271

6. Amsterdam 43,570,370 31. Lisbon 13,260,9787. Guangzhou 37,048,712 32. Hamburg 12,229,3398. Rome(Fiumicino)

33,723,213 33. Prague 11,625,752

9. Munich 32,681,067 34. Nanjing 10,835,23610. Tokyo(Narita)

32,135,191 35. Chennai 10,189,763

11. Istanbul(Atatürk)

29,854,119 36. Cologne 9,739,581

12. Seoul(Incheon)

28,677,161 37. Abu Dhabi 9,672,325

13. Barcelona 27,301,662 38. Birmingham(UK)

9,109,466

14. New Delhi 25,282,814 39. Bahrain 9,053,63115. Mumbai 24,804,766 40. Edinburgh 9,050,89016. Mexico City 24,243,056 41. Lima 8,786,00317. Manila 23,945,801 42. Warsaw 8,320,927

21

18. Chengdu 22,638,671 43. Budapest 8,084,31219. Palma deMallorca

21,197,399 44. Hanoi 7,834,753

20. Copenhagen 19,668,804 45. Salvador(Brazil)

7,774,620

21. Moscow(DME)

18,733,466 46. Lyon 7,717,609

22. Vienna 18,114,103 47. Zhengzhou 7,342,53523. Düsseldorf 17,792,853 48. Marseille 7,290,11924. Brussels 16,970,654 49. Glasgow 7,228,65925. Athens 16,208,009 50. St.

Petersburg6,758,352

Source: Tallied from ACI 2010, 37-73; CDG stands for Charles de GaulleAirport, DME refers to Domodedovo International Airport, and ARN pertains toArlanda Airport

All in all, the 50 busiest airports served 106 out of 1,007

heritage sites, or roughly 10.5 percent of the World Heritage

list, and about 34 percent of the sites fulfilling criteria ii

and iv or ii and vi [106 out of 311 possible sites]. This

indicates that an airport, on average, catered to around two

heritage sites. Appendix A shows the heritage site-commercial

airport correspondence for all 311 sites, with the 106 sites

served by the 50 airports highlighted in yellow.

Assessing the sacred city network

As mentioned, this piece replicates some of the methods

resorted to by Grubesic and Matisziw. While their analysis of

route capacity, or the average number of seats per week scheduled

22

between airports, and the actual minimum geographic distance

involved in traveling between cities in the network could not be

replicated due to constraints in data accessibility, metrics like

degree of node and the D-matrix were calculable, and will be

relied upon to assess the extent, breadth, and depth of the

sacred city network.

Table 4 details the sacred cities with a nodal degree of at

least 30. Compared to the world city airline network presented

earlier, the sacred city network has an n of cases of nodal

degrees >= 30 that is more than twice as small as the world city

airline network [19 cities compared to seven in the sacred city

network].

Table 4: Degree of node (>= 30) for sacred citiesCity Degree of node D-matrix

1. London 40 582. Frankfurt 35 63T3. Amsterdam 34 64T3. Istanbul(Atatürk)

34 64

T3. Munich 34 64T3. Paris (Charlesde Gaulle)

34 64

7. Rome (Fiumicino) 32 66

23

The second-ranked sacred city, Frankfurt, would place

seventh in the world city airline network when its nodal degree

[n = 35] is considered. Furthermore, the least connected sacred

city in the network is Salvador, Brazil with two direct linkages.

The world city airport network, by contrast, considers another

Brazilian city, Rio de Janeiro [n = 8], as the least connected

city in the world city airline network, but with four times as

many direct connections as Salvador. Interestingly, all seven

sacred cities with nodal degrees >= 30 are part of the top 50

cities in the 2008 Global Cities Index. Also, only two of the

nine least connected cities, or cities with nodal degrees < 10,

in the sacred city network – Salvador [n = 2], Lima [n = 3],

Zhengzhou [n = 5], Chennai [n = 6], Hangzhou [n = 7], Mexico City

[n = 7], Nanjing [n = 7], Glasgow [n = 9], and Manila [n =9] –

were ranked in the Global Cities Index. Thus, the most connected

sacred cities are also highly ranked world cities, while the

least connected sacred cities are not.

The sacred city network has a narrower breadth and shallower

connectivities than the world city airline network.

Geographically, only four inhabited continents are represented.

24

No African city is in the sacred city network, while only one

North American and South American city each is present

[interestingly, no American or Canadian city is listed as many of

their UNESCO Heritage sites are either natural or mixed

natural/cultural]. In line with this, European cities dominate

the upper echelons of the rankings, which may say something about

the European Union’s Open Skies program than connectivities based

on sacredness. The data on cities such as Jeddah, the gateway to

Mecca, Abu Dhabi, Beijing, and Tokyo – as illustrated in Appendix

B – somewhat cancel this proposition out and keep the prospects

of a viable sacred city network open. Expectedly, the sacred city

network is not as deep as the world city airline network since

only seven sacred cities have degrees of node >= 30, compared to

the world city airline network’s 19. Also, religiously motivated

travel seems costlier, as evinced by the high D-matrix values of

the network. Higher D-values means more missing direct linkages

between cities in a given network, and the cities in the sacred

city network have greater D-values than their counterparts in the

world city airline network.

Conclusion and prospects for future research

25

Research on city networks has come a long way since the

likes of Friedmann, Wolff, and Sassen introduced the subject to

the lexicon of disciplines as far-ranging as Economics, Political

Science, Sociology, and Urban Studies. Understandably, a

substantial part of what constitutes the knowledge base of

scholarly work on city networks revolves around politico-economic

and, to some extent, sociological concepts. Developed metrics of

‘world city-ness’ are based broadly on the circulation of capital

and its governance in a globalizing world, as punctuated by

headquarters of advanced producer services firms and their

attendant activities. These firms – accountancy, advertising,

banking/finance, insurance, law, and management/consultancy –

interlock cities to produce spaces of capital-based flows

(Taylor, Ni, and Derudder 2011, 4-5). The underlying logic of

this model is consistent with the ways corporations function in

an era of globalization: they operate through multi-office urban

networks to more efficiently service clients and maintain brand

integrity (Taylor, Ni, and Derudder 2011, 4).

This piece illustrates the possibilities of extending the

frontiers of world city research. Religion, spirituality, and

26

sacredness, the proverbial elephant in the room in many fields

across the social sciences, have figured prominently in this

globalizing world, as manifested in increased volumes of air

travel to religious spaces and sacred sites. What may be sacred

to some may not necessarily be as sacred to others, but some

consensus on what constitutes it could be reached through the

interplay between early socialization in a religious setting,

identity-formation, and the subsequent creation of sacred space.

The making of sacred sites, outside of more formal processes

religions engage in, is also a personal and intimate experience,

and could be captured by travel and pilgrimage, among others.

The nascent sacred city network presented in this work is

representative of these dynamic and reflexive practices.

Typically, pilgrimages to holy sites and the cities they are

situated in are seen as voyages made by the religious in

accordance with their religions: Muslims undertake the Hajj in

Mecca, Roman Catholics flock to the Vatican during Easter, and

Hindus revere Varanasi. But as religious experiences become more

‘privatized,’ due to a wide range of reasons such the so-called

post-modern cultural turn, the globalization of the local through

27

mass media, and the turn of the millennium (Olsen and Timothy

2006, 3-4), people have increasingly participated in “unmediated,

reflexive forms of spiritual travel” (Olsen and Timothy 2006, 3).

Thus, it is not implausible to conceive of a sacred city network

that includes travelers of different faiths and beliefs voyaging

to sites and cities held sacred by people of other faiths.

This phenomenon offers a viable starting point for further

research and inquiry into cities connected to some extent by

religious conviction. At the same time, these forms of inquiry

should lead scholars and students alike to recast and widen their

perspectives on what makes a city sacred. As evidenced by this

paper, atypical sacred cities abound: the Upper Middle Rhine

Valley near Frankfurt, Chennai, and Tokyo are basing points of

religious and spiritual experience through the churches and

temples, mini-shrines and gardens, dotting these cities.

These are very vibrant times for studying the sacrosanct.

City networks are one of the fields of investigation that

accommodate these exciting times.

28

Appendix A: List of sacred UNESCO World Heritage Sites withairports and IATA airport codes (cats. ii and iv OR ii and vi)

Timgad, Algiers, Algeria: Houari Boumediene Airport (ALG)Kasbah of Algiers, Algiers, Algeria: Houari Boumediene Airport(ALG)Jesuit block and Estancias of Cordóba, Argentina: Pajas Blancas(COR)Quebrada de Humahuaca, Province of Jujuy, Argentina: San Salvadorde Jujuy (JUJ)Monasteries of Haghpat and Sanahin, Haghpat and Sanahin, Armenia:Shirak International Airport (LWN)Historic Centre of the City of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria:Salzburg Airport (SZG)Semmering Railway, Semmering Pass, Austria: Vienna InternationalAirport (VIE)City of Graz, Graz, Austria: Graz Airport (GRZ)Wachau Cultural Landscape, Wachau Valley, Austria: ViennaInternational Airport (VIE)Historic Centre of Vienna, Vienna, Austria: Vienna InternationalAirport (VIE)Qal’at al-Bahrain, Bahrain Island, Bahrain: Bahrain InternationalAirport (BAH)Ruins of the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur, Rajshahi, Bangladesh:Shah Makhdum Airport (RJH)Historic Bridgetown and its Garrison, Bridgetown, Barbados:Grantley Adams Int’l Airport (BGI)Mir Castle Complex, Grodno Oblast, Belarus: Minsk NationalAirport (MSQ)Architectural. Residential and Cultural Complex of the RadziwillFamily at Nesvish, Minsk Province, Belarus: Minsk NationalAirport (MSQ)Flemish Béguinages, northern Belgium: Antwerp Int’l Airport (ANR)La Grand-Place, Brussels, Belgium: Brussels Airport (BRU)Historic Centre of Brugge, Brugge, Belgium: Brussels Airport(BRU)Major Town Houses of the Architect Victor Horta, Brussels,Belgium: Brussels Airport (BRU)

29

Notre Dame Cathedral in Tournai, Hainaut Province, Belgium:Brussels South Charleroi Airport (CRL)Plantin-Moretus House-Workshops Museum-Complex, Antwerp, Belgium:Antwerp Int’l Airport (ANR)Major Mining Sites of Wallonia, northern Belgium, Belgium:Antwerp Int’l Airport (ANR)Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos, Santa Cruz de la Sierra,Bolivia: Viru-Viru Int’l Airport (VVI)Mehmed Paša Sokolović Bridge in Višegrad, Višegrad, Bosnia andHerzegovina: Sarajevo Int’l Airport (SJJ)Historic Centre of the Town of Olinda, Recife, Brazil: GuararapesInt’l Airport (REC)Historic Centre of Salvador de Bahia, Salvador, Brazil: DeputadoLuís Eduardo Magalhães Int’l Airport (SSA)Historic Centre of the Town of Diamantina, Brazil: Tancredo NevesInt’l Airport (CNF)Historic Centre of the Town of Goiás, Goiás, Brazil: SantaGenoveva Airport (GYN)São Francisco Square in the Town of São Cristóvao, São Cristovao,Brazil: Santa Maria Airport (AJU)Cidade Velha, Historic Centre of Ribeira Grande, Santiago Island,Cape Verde: Praia Int’l Airport (RAI)Angkor, Siem Reap, Cambodia: Siem Reap Int’l Airport (REP)Imperial Palaces of the Ming and Qing Dynasties in Beijing andShenyang, Beijing, China: Beijing-Capital Int’l Airport (PEK)The Great Wall, Beijing, China: Beijing-Capital Int’l Airport (PEK)Ancient Building Complex in the Wudang Mountains, Shiyan, China:Xiangyang Liuji Airport (XFN)Historic Ensemble of the Potala Palace, Lhasa, Lhasa, Tibet:Lhasa Gonggar Airport (LXA)Mountain Resort and its Outlying Temples, Chengde, Chengde,China: Beijing-Capital Int’l Airport (PEK)Lushan National Park, Jiujiang, China: Jiujiang Lushan Airport(JIU)Ancient City of Ping Yao, Ping Yao, China: Taiyuan Wusu Int’lAirport (TYN)Classical Gardens of Suzhou, Suzhou, China: Sunan Shuofang Int’lAirport (WUX)

30

Old Town of Lijiang, Lijiang, China: Lijiang Sanyi Airport (LJG)Imperial Tombs of the Ming and Qing Dynasties, Nanjing, China:Nanjing Lukou Int’l Airport (NKG)Mount Qingcheng and the Dujiangyan Irrigation System, Chengdu,China: Chengdu Shuangliu Int’l Airport (CTU)Yungang Grottoes, Datong, China: Datong Yungang Airport (DAT)Capital Cities and Tombs of the Ancient Koguryo Kingdom, Benxi,China: Shenyang Taoxian Int’l Airport (SHE)Historic Centre of Macao, Macao, China: Macao Int’l Airport (MFM)Yin Xu, Anyang, China: Zhengzhou Xinzheng int’l Airport (CGO)Kaiping Diaolou and Villages, Kaiping, China: Guangzhou BaiyunInt’l Airport (CAN)Mount Wutai, Shanxi Province, China: Taiyuan Wusu Int’l Airport(TYN)West Lake Cultural Landscape of Hangzhou, Hangzhou, China:Hangzhou Xiaoshan Int’l Airport (HGH)Site of Xanadu, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, China: HohhotBaita Int’l Airport: (HET)Historical Complex of Split with the Palace of Diocletian, Split,Croatia: Split Airport (SPU)Episcopal Complex of the Euphrasian Basilica in the HistoricCentre of Poreč, Poreč, Croatia: Zagreb Int’l Airport (ZAG)Historic City of Trogir, Trogir, Croatia: Split Airport (SPU)The Cathedral of St. James in Šibenik, Šibenik, Croatia: SplitAirport (SPU)Urban Historic Centre of Cienfuegos, Cienfuegos, Cuba: JaimeGonzález Airport (CFG)Painted Churches in the Troodos Region, Troodos Region, Cyprus:Larnaca Int’l Airport (LCA)Choirokoitia, Larnaca, Cyprus: Larnaca Int’l Airport (LCA)Historic Centre of Prague, Prague, Czech Republic: Václav HavelAirport Prague (PRG)Kutná Hora: Historical Town Centre with the Church of St. Barbaraand the Cathedral of Our Lady at Sedlec, Kutná Hora, CzechRepublic: Václav Havel Airport Prague (PRG)Lednice-Valtice Cultural Landscape, Breclav District, CzechRepublic: Brno-Tucany Airport (BRQ)Gardens and Castle at Kroměříž, Kroměříž, Czech Republic: LeošJanáček Airport Ostrava (OSR)

31

Holašovice Historical Village Reservation, České Budějovice,Czech Republic: Václav Havel Airport Prague (PRG)Litomyšl Castle, Pardubice Region, Czech Republic: Václav HavelAirport Prague (PRG)Tugendhat Villa in Brno, Brno, Czech Republic: Brno-TucanyAirport (BRQ)Complex of Koguryo Tombs, Pyongyang, Democratic People’s Republicof Korea: Pyongyang Sunan Int’l Airport (FNJ)Roskilde Cathedral, Roskilde, Denmark: Copenhagen Airport (CPH)Colonial City of Santo Domingo, Santo Domingo, DominicanRepublic: Las Américas Int’l Airport (SDQ)City of Quito, Quito, Ecuador: Mariscal Sucre Int’l Airport (UIO)Historic Centre of Santa Ana de los Ríos de Cuenca, Cuenca,Ecuador: Mariscal Lamar Int’l Airport (CUE)Historic Centre (Old Town) of Tallinn, Tallinn, Estonia: TallinnAirport (TLL)Lower Valley of the Awash, Awash Region, Ethiopia: Addis AbabaBole Int’l Airport (ADD)Harar Jugol, the Fortified Historic Town, Harari Region,Ethiopia: Addis Ababa Bole Int’l Airport (ADD)Levuka Historical Port Town, Levuka, Fiji: Nadi Int’l Airport(NAN)Chartres Cathedral, Chartres, France: Charles de Gaulle Airport(CDG)Palace and Park of Versailles, Versailles, France: Charles deGaulle Airport (CDG)Arles, Roman and Romanesque Monuments, Arles, France: MarseilleProvence Airport (MRS)Palace and Park of Fontainebleau, Seine-et-Marne, France: Charlesde Gaulle Airport (CDG)From the Great Saltworks of Salins-les-Bains to the RoyalSaltworks of Arc-et-Senans, the Production of Open-pan Salt,Besançon, France: Lyon-Saint Exupéry Airport (LYS)Strasbourg – Grande île, Strasbourg, France: StrasbourgInternational Airport (SXB)

32

Cathedral of Notre-Dame, Former Abbey of Saint-Rémi and Palace ofTau, Reims, Reims, France: Charles de Gaulle Airport (CDG)Paris, Banks of the Seine, Paris, France: Charles de GaulleAirport (CDG)Historic Centre of Avignon, Papal Palace, Episcopal Ensemble andAvignon Bridge, Avignon, France: Marseille Provence Airport (MRS)Canal du Midi, Toulouse, France: Toulouse-Blagnac Airport (TLS)Historic Fortified City of Carcassonne, Carcassonne, France:Montpellier-Méditerranée Airport (MPL)Historic Site of Lyons, Lyon, France: Lyon-Saint Exupéry Airport(LYS) Routes of Santiago de Compostela in France, various sites,France: Toulouse-Blagnac Airport (TLS)The Loire Valley between Sully-sur-Loire and Chalonnes, LoireValley, France: Charles de Gaulle Airport (CDG)Provins, Town of Medieval Fairs, Seine-et-Marne, France: Charlesde Gaulle Airport (CDG)Le Havre, the City Rebuilt by Auguste Perret, Le Havre, France:Charles de Gaulle Airport (CDG)Bordeaux, Port of the Moon, Bordeaux, France: Bordeaux-MérignacAirport (BOD)Fortifications of Vauban, various sites, France: Charles deGaulle Airport (CDG)Nord-Pas de Calais Mining Basin, Nord-Pas de Calais, France:Lille Airport (LIL)Aachen Cathedral, Aachen, Germany: Cologne-Bonn Airport (CGN)Castles of Augustusburg and Falkenlust at Brühl, Brühl, Germany:Cologne-Bonn Airport (CGN)Palaces and Parks of Potsdam and Berlin, Berlin, Germany: BerlinTegel Airport (TXL)Mines of Rammelsberg, Historic Town of Goslar and Upper HarzWater Management System, Goslar, Germany: Hannover Airport (HAJ)Maulbronn Monastery Complex, Stuttgart Germany: Stuttgart Airport(STR)Town of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany: Munich Airport (MUC)Völklingen Ironworks, Völklingen, Germany: Saarbrücken Airport (SCN)

33

Bauhaus and its Sites in Weimar and Dessau, Weimar and Dessau,Germany: Leipzig/Halle Airport (LEJ)Cologne Cathedral, Cologne, Germany: Cologne-Bonn Airport (CGN)Luther Memorials in Eisleben and Wittenberg, Eisleben andWittenberg, Germany: Cologne-Bonn Airport (CGN)

34

Museumsinsel, Berlin, Germany: Berlin Tegel Airport (TXL)Garden Kingdom of Dessau-Wörlitz, State of Sachsen-Anhalt,Germany: Cologne-Bonn Airport (CGN)Monastic Island of Reichenau, Freiburg, Germany: Baden Airpark(FKB)Historic Centres of Stralsund and Wismar, Wismar and Stralsund,Germany: Hamburg Airport (HAM)Upper Middle Rhine Valley, States of Rheinland-Pfalz and Hessen:Frankfurt Airport (FRA)Town Hall and Roland on the Marketplace of Bremen, Bremen,Germany: Bremen Airport (BRE)Old town of Regensburg with Stadtamhof, Regensburg, Germany:Munich Airport (MUC)Berlin Modernism Housing Estates, Berlin, Germany: Berlin TegelAirport (TXL)Fagus Factory in Alfeld, Alfeld, Germany: Hannover Airport (HAJ)Carolingian Westwork and Civitas Corvey, River Weser, Germany:Düsseldorf Airport (DUS)Acropolis, Athens, Athens, Greece: Athens Int’l Airport (ATH)Archaeological Site of Delphi, Phocis, Greece: Athens Int’lAirport (ATH)Medieval City of Rhodes, Rhodes, Greece: Rhodes Int’l Airport(RHO)Paleochristian and Byzantine Monuments of Thessalonika,Thessaloniki, Greece: Thessaloniki Int’l Airport (SKG)Sanctuary of Asklepios at Epidaurus, Peloponnese region, Greece:Kalamata Int’l Airport (KLX)Archaeological Site of Mystras, Mystras, Greece: Kalamata Int’lAirport (KLX)Archaeological of Olympia, Elis Prefecture, Greece: KalamataInt’l Airport (KLX)Delos, Delos, Greece: Mykonos Island National Aiport (JMK)Archaeological Sites of Mycenae and Tiryns, Argolis Prefecture:Kalamata Int’l Airport (KLX)The Historic Centre (Chorá) with the Monastery of Saint-John the Theologian and the Cave of the Apocalypse on the Island of Pátmos, Dedocanese Prefecture, Greece: Rhodes Int’l Airport (RHO)Antigua Guatemala, Antigua, Guatemala: La Aurora Int’l Airport (GUA)

35

Archaeological Park and Ruins of Quirigua, Quiriguá, Guatemala: La Aurora Int’l Airport (GUA)National History Park – Citadel, Sans Souci, Ramiers, Départementdu Nord, Haiti: Toussaint Louverture Int’l Airport (PAP)Vatican City, Vatican City, Vatican City: Leonardo da Vinci-Fiumicino Airport (FCO)Maya Site of Copan, Copán, Honduras: Toncontín Int’l Airport (TGU)Budapest, including the Banks of the Danube, the Buda Castle Quarter and Andrássy Avenue, Budapest, Hungary: Budapest Ferenc Liszt Int’l Airport (BUD)Millenary Benedictine Abbey of Pannonhalma and its Natural Environment, Pannonhalma, Hungary: Gyor-Pér Int’l Airport (QGY)Ajanta Caves, Aurangabad District, India: Chhatrapati Shivaji Int’l Airport (BOM)Group of Monuments at Mahabalipuram, Tamil Nadu State, India: Chennai Int’l Airport (MAA)Churches and Convents of Goa, Goa, India: Goa Int’l Airport (GOI)Fatehpur Sikri, Uttar Pradesh State, India: Chaudhary Charan Singh Int’l Airport (LKO)

36

Buddhist Monuments at Sanchi, Sanchi, India: Devi Ahilyabai Holkar Airport (IDR)Humayun’s Tomb, Delhi, India: Indira Gandhi Int’l Airport (DEL)Mountain Railways of India, various sites, India: Indira Gandhi Int’l Airport (DEL)Mahabodhi Temple Complex at Bodh Gaya, Bohd Gaya, India: Gaya Airport (GAY)Chhatrapati Shibaji Terminus, Mumbai, India: Chhatrapati Shivaji Int’l Airport (BOM)Red Fort Complex, Delhi, India: Indira Gandhi Int’l Airport (DEL)Borobodur Temple Compounds, Magelang, Indonesia: Adisucipto Int’lAirport (JOG)Cultural Landscape of Bali Province: the Subak System as aManifestation of the Tri Hita Karana Philosophy, Bali, Indonesia:Denpasar Int’l Airport (DPS)Takht-e Soleyman, Urmia, Iran: Urmia Airport (QMH)Bam and its cultural Landscape, Ban, Iran: Bam Airport (BXR)Pasargadaem, Pars, Iran: Shiraz Int’l Airport (SYC)Soltaniyeh, Soltaniyeh, Iran: Shiraz Int’l Airport (SYC)Armenian Mosantic Ensembles of Iran, West Azerbaijan province,Iran: Shiraz int’l Airport (SYC)Sheikh Safi al-din Khānegāh and Shrine Ensemble in Ardabil,Ardabil, Iran: Ardabil Airport (ADU)Tabriz Historic Bazaar Complex, Tabriz, Iran: Tabriz Int’lAirport (TBZ)The Persian Garden, various sites, Iran: Tehran Imam KhomeiniInt’l Airport (IKA)Gonbad-e Qābus, Gonbad-e Qābus, Iran: Gorgan Airport (GBT)Golestan Palace, Tehran, Iran: Tehran Imam Khomeini Int’l Airport(IKA)Shahr-i Sokhta, Sistan and Balochistan province, Iran: ZahedanAirport (ZAH)Hatra, Hatra, Iraq: Baghdad Int’l Airport (BGW)Historic Centre of Florence, Florence, Italy: Pisa Int’l Airport(PSA)Piazza del Duomo, Pisa, Pisa, Italy: Pisa Int’l Airport (PSA)Venice and its Lagoon, Venice, Italy: Venice Marco Polo Airport(VCE)

37

Ferrara, City of the Renaissance, and its Po Delta, Ferrara,Italy: Bologna Guglielmo Marconi Airport (BLQ)Historic Centre of Naples, Naples, Italy: Naples Int’l Airport(NAP)Historic Centre of Siena, Siena, Italy: Pisa Int’l Airport (PSA)Early Christian Monuments of Ravenna, Ravenna, Italy: BolognaGuglielmo Marconi Airport (BLQ)Historic Centre of the City of Pienza, Pienza, Italy: Pisa Int’lAirport (PSA)18th-Century Royal Palace at Caserta with the Park, the Aqueductof Vanvitelli, and the San Leucio Complex, Campania region,Italy: Naples Int’l Airport (NAP)Archaeological Area of Agrigento, Agrigento, Italy: Falcone-Borsellino Airport (PMO)Cathedral, Torre Civica and Piazza Grande, Modena, Modena, Italy:Bologna Guglielmo Marconi Airport (BLQ)Costiera Amalfitana, Sorrentine Peninsula, Italy: Naples Int’lAirport (NAP)Portovenere, Cinque Terre, and the Islands, La Spezia province,Italy: Genoa Cristoforo Colombo Airport (GOA)Residences of the Royal House of Savoy, Turin, Italy: TurinAirport (TRN)Historic Centre of Urbino, Urbino, Italy: Ancona FalconaraAirport (AOI)Assisi, the Basilica of San Francesco and Other Franciscan Sites,Assisi, Italy: Perugia San Francesco d’Assisi – Umbria Int’lAirport (PEG)City of Verona, Verona, Italy: Verona Villafranca Airport (VRN)

38

Villa d’Este, Tivoli, Tivoli, Lazio region, Italy: Leonardo daVinci-Fiumicino Airport (FCO)Late Baroque Towns of the Val di Noto (South-Eastern Sicily),southeastern Sicily, Italy: Catania-Fontanarossa Airport (CTA)Sacri Monti of Piedmont and Lombardy, Lombardy and Piedmontregions, Italy: Turin Airport (TRN)Syracuse and the Rocky Necropolis of Pantalica, southeasternSicily, Italy: Catania-Fontanarossa Airport (CTA)Genoa: Le Strade Nuove and the system of the Palazzi dei Rolli, Genoa,Italy: Genoa Cristoforo Colombo Airport (GOA)Longobards in Italy. Places of the Power (568-774 A.D.), varioussites, Italy: Leonardo da Vinci-Fiumicino Airport (FCO)Medici Villas and Gardens in Tuscany, Tuscany region, Italy:Florence Airport, Peretola (FLR)Buddhist Monuments in the Horyu-Ji Area, Ikaruga, Japan: KansaiInt’l Airport (KIX)Historic Monuments of Ancient Kyoto (Kyoto, Uji and Otsu Cities),Kyoto, Japan: Kansai Int’l Airport (KIX)Itsukushima Shinto Shrine, Hiroshima, Japan: Hiroshima Airport(HIJ)Historic Monuments of Ancient Nara, Nara, Japan: Kansai Int’lAirport (KIX)Gusuku Sites and Related Properties of the Kingdom of Ryukyu,Okinawa Prefecture, Japan: Naha Airport (OKA)Sacred Sites and Pilgrimage Routes in the Kii Mountain Range, KiiPeninsula, Japan: Kansai Int’l Airport (KIX)Hiraizumi – Temples, Gardens and Archaeological SitesRepresenting the Buddhist Pure Land, Hiraizumi, Japan: HanamakiAirport (HNA)Tomioka Silk Mill and Related Sites, Tomioka, Japan: Narita Int’lAirport (NRT)Town of Luang Prabang, Luang Prabang, Laos: Luang Prabang Int’lAirport (LPQ)Archaeological Site of Cyrene, Cyrene, Libya: Benina Int’lAirport (BEN)Vilnius Historic Centre, Vilnius, Lithuania: Vilnius Airport(VNO)

39

Melaka and George Town, Historic Cities of the Straits ofMalacca, Malacca City and George Town, Malaysia: Penang Int’lAirport (PEN)Historic Centre of Mexico City and Xochimilco, Mexico City,Mexico: Mexico City Int’l Airport (MEX)Historic Centre of Oaxaca and Archaeological Site of Monte Albán,Oaxaca state, Mexico: Xoxocotlán Int’l Airport (OAX)Historic Centre of Puebla, Puebla, Mexico: Puebla Int’l Airport(PBC)Pre-Hispanic City and National Park of Palenque, Palenque,Mexico: Ángel Albino Corzo Int’l Airport (TGZ)Pre-Hispanic City of Teotihuacan, Teotihuacan, Mexico: MexicoCity Int’l Airport (MEX)Historic Centre of Morelia, Morelia, Mexico: General Francisco J.Mujica Int’l Airport (MLM)Historic Centre of Zacatecas, Zacatecas, Mexico: General LeobardoC. Ruiz Int’l Airport (CZL)Earliest 16th-Century Monasteries on the Slopes of Popocatepetl,Popocatepétl volcano, Mexico: Puebla Int’l Airport (PBC)Historic Monuments Zone of Querétaro, Querétaro, Mexico:Querétaro Int’l Airport (QRO)Hospicio Cabañas, Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Mexico: GuadalajaraInt’l Airport (GDL)Historic Fortified Town of Campeche, Campeche, Mexico: Ing.Alberto Acuña Ongay Int’l Airport (CPE) 198, 66Agave Landscape and Ancient Industrial Facilities of Tequila,Valles region, Mexico: Guadalajara Int’l Airport (GDL)Central University City Campus of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma deMéxico (UNAM), Mexico City, Mexico: Mexico City Int’l Airport(MEX)Protective town of San Miguel and the Sanctuary of Jesús Nazarenode Atotonilco, San Miguel, Mexico: Del Bajío Int’l Airport (BJX)Camino Real de Tierra Adentro, various sites, Mexico: Mexico CityInt’l Airport (MEX)Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape, along the banks of the OrkhonRiver, Mongolia: Chinggis Khaan Int’l Airport (ULN)National and Culturo-Historical Region of Kotor, Kotor andsurrounding areas, Montenegro: Tivat Airport (TIV)Medina of Fez, Fez, Morocco: Fes-Saïss Airport (FEZ)

40

Medina of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco: Marrakesh Menara Airport(RAK)Archaeological Site of Volubilis, Meknes, Morocco: Fes-SaïssAirport (FEZ)Medina of Tétouan (formerly known as Titawin), Tétouan, Morocco:Sania Ramel Airport (TTU)Medina of Essaouira (formerly Mogador), Essaouira, Morocco:Essaouira-Mogador Airport (ESU)Portuguese City of Mazagan (El Jadida), Mazagan, Morocco: Fes-Saïss Airport (FEZ)Rabat: Modern Capital and Historic City: a Shared Heritage,Rabat, Morocco: Rabat-Salé Airport (RBA)Pyu Ancient Cities, Pyu, Myanmar: Naypyidaw Int’l Airport (NYT)Defence Line of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands: AmsterdamAirport Schipol (AMS)Historic Area of Willemstad, Inner City and Harbour, Willemstad,Curaçao: Hato Int’l Airport (CUR)Mill Network at Kinderdijk-Elshout, Kinderdijk, the Netherlands:Rotterdam The Hague Airport (RTM)Ir.D.F. Woudagemaal (D.F. Wouda Steam Pumping Station), De FrieseMeren, the Netherlands: Amsterdam Airport Schipol (AMS)Droogmakerij de Beemster (Beemster Polder), Noord-Hollandprovince, the Netherlands: Amsterdam Airport Schipol (AMS)Seventeenth-Century Canal Ring Area of Amsterdam inside theSingelgracht, Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Amsterdam AirportSchipol (AMS)Van Nellefabriek, Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Rotterdam The HagueAirport (RTM)León Cathedral, León, Nicaragua: Augusto C. Sandino Int’l Airport(MGA)Osun-Osogbo Sacred Grove, Osogbo, Nigeria: Ilorin Int’l Airport(ILR)Rohtas Fort, Jhelum City, Pakistan: Benazir Bhutto Int’l Airport(ISB)Archaeological Site of Panamá Viejo and Historic District ofPanamá, Panamá City, Panamá: Tocumen Int’l Airport (PTY)Sacred City of Caral-Supe, Caral-Supe, Peru: Jorge Chávez Int’lAirport (LIM)

41

Baroque Churches of the Philippines, various sites, thePhilippines: Ninoy Aquino Int’l Airport (MNL)Historic Town of Vigan, Vigan, the Philippines: Laoag Int’lAirport (LAO)Historic Centre of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland: Warsaw Chopin Airport(WAW)Castle of the Teutonic Order in Malbork, Malbork, Poland: GdańskLech Wałęsa Airport (GDN)Medieval Town of Toruń, Toruń, Poland: Gdańsk Lech Wałęsa Airport(GDN) 229, 73Kalwaria Zebrzydowska: the Mannerist Architectural and ParkLandscape Complex and Pilgrimage Park, Lesser Poland Voivodeship:John Paul II Int’l Airport Kraków-Balice (KRK)Centennial Hall in Wrocław, Wrocław, Poland: Wrocław-CopernicusAirport (WRO)Historic Centre of Évora, Évora, Portugal: Lisbon Portela Airport(LIS)Cultural Landscape of Sintra, Sintra, Portugal: Lisbon PortelaAirport (LIS)Historic Centre of Guimarães, Guimarães, Portugal: Francisco deSá Carneiro Airport (OPO)University of Coimbra – Alta and Sofia, Coimbra, Portugal:Francisco de Sá Carneiro Airport (OPO)Changdeokgung Palace Complex, Seoul, South Korea: Incheon Int’lAirport (ICN)Namhansanseong, Seoul, South Korea: Incheon Int’l Airport (ICN)Dacian Fortresses of the Orastie Mountains, Hunedoara and Albacounties, Romania: Sibiu Int’l Airport (SBZ)Historic Centre of Saint Petersburg and Related Groups ofMonuments, Saint Petersburg, Russia: Pulkovo Airport (LED)Kremlin and Red Square, Moscow, Moscow, Russia: Domodedovo Int’l Airport (DME)Historic Monuments of Novgorod and Surroundings, Veliky Novgorod,Russia: Pulkovo Airport (LED)White Monuments of Vladimir and Suzdal, Vladimir Oblast, Russia: Domodedovo Int’l Airport (DME)Architectural Ensemble of the Trinity Sergius Lavra in Sergiev Posad, Moscow region, Russia: Domodedovo Int’l Airport (DME)

42

Historic and Architectural Complex of the Kazan Kremlin, Kazan, Russia: Kazan Int’l Airport (KZN)Historic Centre of the City of Yaroslavl, Yaroslavl, Russia: Tunoshna Airport (IAR)Bolgar Historical and Archaeological Complex, Kazan, Russia: Kazan Int’l Airport (KZN)Historic Jeddah, the Gate to Makkah, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: King Abdulaziz Int’l Airport (JED)Island of Saint-Louis, Saint-Louis region, Senegal: Léopold SédarSenghor Int’l Airport (DKR)Studenica Monastery, Kraljevo, Serbia: Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport (BEG)Mapungubwe Cultural Landscape, Northern Province, South Africa: Polokwane Int’l Airport (PTG)Burgos Cathedral, Burgos, Spain: Burgos Airport (RGS)Historic Centre of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain: San Pablo Airport (SVQ)Monastery and Site of the Escurial, Madrid, Madrid, Spain: AdolfoSuárez Madrid-Barajas Airport (MAD)Works of Antoni Gaudí, Barcelona, Spain: Barcelona-El Prat Airport (BCN)Monuments of Oviedo and the Kingdom of Asturias, Oviedo, Spain: Asturias Airport (OVD)Santiago de Compostela (Old Town), Santiago de Compostela, Spain:Santiago de Compostela Airport (SCQ)Historic City of Toledo, Toledo, Spain: Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas Airport (MAD)Cathedral, Alcázar and Archivo de Indias in Seville, Seville, Spain: San Pablo Airport (SVQ)Old City of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain: Salamanca Airport (SLM)

Route of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain:Santiago de Compostela Airport (SCQ)

43

Las Médulas, León, Spain: León Airport (LEN)Palau de la Música Catalana and Hospital de Sant Pau, Barcelona,Barcelona, Spain: Barcelona-El Prat Airport (BCN) 262, 87San Millán Yuso and Suso Monasteries, San Millán de la Cogolla,Spain: Logroño-Agoncillo Airport (RJL)University and Historic Precinct of Alcalá de Henares, Alcalá deHenares, Spain: Adolfo Suárez Madrid-Barajas Airport (MAD)San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain:Tenerife North Airport (TFN)Catalan Romanesque Churches of the Vall de Boí, Vall de Boí,Spain: Barcelona-El Prat Airport (BCN)Aranjuez Cultural Landscape, Province of Madrid, Spain: AdolfoSuárez Madrid-Barajas Airport (MAD)Renaissance Monumental Ensembles of Úbeda and Baeza, Province ofJaen, Spain: Federico García Lorca Airport (GRX)Cultural Landscape of the Serra de Tramuntana, Palma de Mallorca,Spain: Palma de Mallorca Airport (PMI)Ancient City of Sigiriya, Sigiriya, Sri Lanka: Sigiriya Airport(GIU)Sacred City of Anuradhapura, Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka: SigiriyaAirport (GIU)Gebel Barkal and the Sites of the Napatan Region, Northern state,Sudan: Dongola Airport (DOG)Archaeological Sites of the Island of Meroe, Meroe, Sudan:Dongola Airport (DOG)Historic Inner City of Paramaribo, Paramaribo, Suriname: JohanAdolf Pengel Int’l Airport (PBM)Skogskyrkogården, Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm Arlanda Airport(ARN)Church Town of Gammelstad, Luleå, Luleå, Sweden: Luleå Airport(LLA)Naval Port of Karlskrona, Karlskrona, Sweden: Ronneby Airport(RNB)Grimeton Radio Station, Varberg, Varberg, Sweden: HalmstadAirport (HAD)Abby of St. Gall, St. Gallen, Switzerland: St. Gallen-AltenrheinAirport (ACH)Stone Town of Zanzibar, Zanzibar City, Tanzania: Abeid AmaniKarume Int’l Airport (ZNZ)

44

Archaeological Site of Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia: Tunis-CarthageInt’l Airport (TUN)Kairouan, Kairouan, Tunisia: Enfidha-Hammamet Int’l Airport (NBE)Historic Areas of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey: Istanbul AtatürkAirport (IST)Hattusha: the Hittite Capital, Sungurlu, Turkey: Amasya MerzifonAirport (MZH)City of Safranbolu, Safranbolu, Turkey: Zonguldak Airport (ONQ)Archaeological Site of Troy, Tevfikiye, Turkey: Çanakkale Airport(CKZ)Bursa and Cumalıkızık: the Birth of the Ottoman Empire, Bursa,Turkey: Istanbul Atatürk Airport (IST)Pergamon and its Multi-Layered Cultural Landscape, Bergama,Turkey: Balıkesir Koca Seyit Airport (EDO)Kiev: Saint-Sophia Cathedral and Related Monastic Buildings,Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, Kiev, Ukraine: Boryspil Int’l Airport (KBP)Residence of Bukovinian and Dalmatian Metropolitans, Chernivtsi,Ukraine: Ivano-Frankivsk Int’l Airport (IFO)Cultural Sites of Al Ain, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates: Abu DhabiInt’l Airport (AUH)Durham Castle and Cathedral, County Durham, United Kingdom:Newcastle Airport (NCL)Ironbridge Gorge, Shropshire, United Kingdom: Birmingham Airport(BHX)Blenheim Palace, Oxford, United Kingdom: London Heathrow Airport(LHR)City of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom: Bristol Airport (BRS)Palace of Westminster and Westminster Abbey including SaintMargaret’s Church, London, United Kindgom: London HeathrowAirport (LHR)Canterbury Cathedral, St. Augustine’s Abbey, and St. Martin’sChurch, Canterbury, United Kingdom: London Heathrow Airport (LHR)Tower of London, London, United Kingdom: London Heathrow Airport(LHR)Old and New Towns of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom:Edinburgh Airport (EDI)Maritime Greenwich, Greenwich, United Kindgom: London HeathrowAirport (LHR)

45

Heart of Neolithic Orkney, various sites, United Kingdom(Scotland): Edinburgh Airport (EDI)Derwent Valley Mills, River Derwent, United Kingdom: EastMidlands Airport (EMA)New Lanark, Lanark, United Kingdom: Glasgow Airport (GLA)Saltaire, Bradford, United Kingdom: Leeds Bradford Int’l Airport(LBA)Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Greater London, United Kingdom:London Heathrow Airport (LHR)Cornwall and West Devon Mining Landscape, Cornwall and West Devoncounties, United Kingdom: Newquay Cornwall Airport (NQY)Pontcysyllte Aqueduct and Canal, Wrexham County Borough, UnitedKingdom (Wales): Liverpool John Lennon Airport (LPL)Historic Centre of Bukhara, Bukhara, Uzbekistan: Bukhara Int’lAirport (BHK)Samarkand – Crossroad of Cultures, Samarkand, Uzbekistan:Samarkand Int’l Airport (SKD)Central Sector of the Imperial Citadel of Thang Long – Hanoi,Hanoi, Vietnam: Noi Bai Int’l Airport (HAN)Citadel of the Ho Dynasty, Vĩnh Lộc District, Vietnam: Tho XuanAirport (THD)

46

Appendix B: Complete table of nodal degrees and D-Matrix valuesfor the sacred city network

City Degree of node D-matrix1. London 40 582. Frankfurt 35 63T3. Amsterdam 34 64T3. Istanbul(Atatürk)

34 64

T3. Munich 34 64T3. Paris (Charlesde Gaulle)

34 64

7. Rome (Fiumicino) 32 66T8. Athens 29 69T8. Madrid 29 6910. Vienna 27 7111. Barcelona 26 72T12. Beijing 25 73T12. Berlin (Tegel) 25 73T12. Brussels 25 73T12. Düsseldorf 25 73T12. Stockholm(Arlanda)

25 73

T17. Copenhagen 24 74T17. Prague 24 7419. Warsaw 23 75T20. Budapest 22 76T20. Edinburgh 22 76T20. Hamburg 22 76T20. Lisbon 22 76T24. Abu Dhabi 21 77T24. Tokyo (Narita) 21 7726. Seoul (Incheon) 20 78T27. Birmingham (UK) 19 79T27. New Delhi 19 79T27. St. Petersburg 19 79T30. Cologne 18 80T30. Lyon 18 80

47

T30. Moscow(Domodedovo)

18 80

33. Osaka (Kansai) 17 8134. Marseille 16 82T35. Guangzhou 15 83T35. Mumbai 15 83T37. Jeddah 11 87T37. Palma deMallorca

11 87

T39. Bahrain 10 88T39. Chengdu 10 88T39. Hanoi 10 88T42. Glasgow 9 89T42. Manila 9 89T44. Hangzhou 7 91T44. Mexico City 7 91T44. Nanjing 7 9147. Chennai 6 9248. Zhengzhou 5 9349. Lima 3 9550. Salvador(Brazil)

2 96

48

References:

Airports Council International. 2010. World Airport Traffic Report 2009.Geneva, Switzerland: ACI World.

Bremer, Thomas S. 2006. “Sacred spaces and tourist places.” InTourism, Religion & Spiritual Journeys, edited by Dallen J. Timothyand Daniel H. Olsen, 25-35. Abingdon, United Kindom:Routledge.

Friedmann, John and Goetz Wolff. 1982. “World city formation: anagenda for research and action.” International Journal of Urban andRegional Research 6 (3): 309-44.

Friedmann, John. 1986. “The World City Hypothesis.” Developmentand Change 17: 69-83.

Grubesic, Tony H. and Timothy C. Matisziw. 2012. “World citiesand airline networks.” In International Handbook of Globalization andWorld Cities, edited by Ben Derudder, Michael Hoyler, Peter J.Taylor, and Frank Witlox, 97-116. Cheltenham, UnitedKingdom: Edward Elgar.

Hill, Andrew. 2011. “The City, the Psyche, and the Visibility ofReligious Spaces.” In A Companion to the City, edited by GaryBridge and Sophie Watson, 367-77. Oxford, United Kingdom:Blackwell.

Hubbard, Phil. 2012. “World cities of sex.” In International Handbookof Globalization and World Cities, edited by Ben Derudder, MichaelHoyler, Peter J. Taylor, and Frank Witlox, 295-305.Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.

Malecki, Edward J. 2012. “Internet networks of world cities:agglomeration and dispersion.” In International Handbook ofGlobalization and World Cities, edited by Ben Derudder, MichaelHoyler, Peter J. Taylor, and Frank Witlox, 117-25.Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.

49

Mazumdar, Shampa and Sanjoy Mazumdar. 2004. “Religion and placeattachment: A study of sacred places.” Journal of EnvironmentalPsychology 24 (3): 385-97.

Olsen, Daniel H. and Dallen J. Timothy. 2006. “Tourism andreligious journeys.” In Tourism, Religion & Spiritual Journeys, editedby Dallen J. Timothy and Daniel H. Olsen, 1-21. Abingdon,United Kindom: Routledge.

Pratt, Andy C. 2012. “The Cultural Economy and the Global City.”In International Handbook of Globalization and World Cities, edited byBen Derudder, Michael Hoyler, Peter J. Taylor, and FrankWitlox, 265-74. Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar.

Sassen, Saskia. 1991. The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton,NJ: Princeton.

Sheldrake, Philip. 2007. “Placing the Sacred: Transcendence andthe City.” Literature & Theology 21 (3): 243-58.

Taylor, Peter. 2003. “Recasting World-Systems Analysis for the21st Century: City Networks for Nation-States.” In EmergingIssues in the 21st Century World-System Volume II: New Theoretical Directions forthe 21st Century World-System, edited by Wilma A. Dunaway, 130-40.Westport, CT: Praeger.

____________. 2004. World City Network: A Global Urban Analysis. London,United Kingdom: Routledge.

____________. 2007. “Cities within spaces of flows: theses for amaterialist understanding of the external relations ofcities.” In Cities in Globalization, edited by Peter J. Taylor,Ben Derudder, Pieter Saey, and Frank Witlox, 276-85.Abingdon, United Kingdom: Oxford.

____________. 2011. “Advanced Producer Service Centres in theWorld Economy.” In Global Urban Analysis: A Survey of Cities inGlobalization, edited by Peter Taylor, Pengfei Ni, Ben

50

Derudder, Michael Hoyler, Jin Huang, and Frank Witlox, 22-39. London, United Kingdom: Earthscan.

Taylor, Peter, Pengfei Ni, and Ben Derudder. 2011. “Introduction:The GUCP/GaWC Project.” In Global Urban Analysis: A Survey of Cities inGlobalization, edited by Peter Taylor, Pengfei Ni, BenDerudder, Michael Hoyler, Jin Huang, and Frank Witlox, 1-13.London, United Kingdom: Earthscan.

UNESCO. 2014. “World Heritage List.” Accessed November 30, 2014.http:// http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/.

Watson, Allan and Michael Hoyler. 2011. “Media Centres in theWorld Economy.” In Global Urban Analysis: A Survey of Cities inGlobalization, edited by Peter Taylor, Pengfei Ni, BenDerudder, Michael Hoyler, Jin Huang, and Frank Witlox, 40-7.London, United Kingdom: Earthscan.

51