Local News

National Trust launches drive to assess 300 archaeological sites

06 July 2026
This content originally appeared on Trinidad Guardian.
Promote your business with NAN

Se­nior Mul­ti­me­dia Re­porter

rad­hi­ca­s­[email protected]

The Na­tion­al Trust of Trinidad and To­ba­go has launched a na­tion­wide pro­gramme to as­sess the con­di­tion of more than 300 known ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sites as it races to doc­u­ment and pro­tect the coun­try’s an­cient her­itage from de­vel­op­ment and en­vi­ron­men­tal change.

The ini­tia­tive, which be­gan with field as­sess­ments in the Or­toire and Ma­yaro re­gion, will see ar­chae­ol­o­gists re­vis­it every record­ed site across Trinidad and To­ba­go, some of which have not been pro­fes­sion­al­ly ex­am­ined for decades.

Se­nior Her­itage Preser­va­tion and Re­search Of­fi­cer and ar­chae­ol­o­gist Ash­leigh John Mor­ris said the project marks one of the most com­pre­hen­sive ar­chae­o­log­i­cal as­sess­ment pro­grammes un­der­tak­en in re­cent years.

“Ar­chae­ol­o­gy has been, I would say, dor­mant in the coun­try for many years,” Mor­ris said.

“Cer­tain sites have not been vis­it­ed by ar­chae­ol­o­gists or her­itage pro­fes­sion­als for some time.”

He said the Na­tion­al Trust is seek­ing to change that by sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly re­vis­it­ing each site.

The ex­er­cise, he ex­plained, is about much more than up­dat­ing records.

“We’re do­ing this not just to gath­er da­ta for our­selves, but al­so to po­ten­tial­ly put more in­for­ma­tion out there for the pub­lic.” How­ev­er, Mor­ris said the ex­act lo­ca­tions of ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sites would not be wide­ly pub­li­cised be­cause of con­cerns they could be­come tar­gets for loot­ing or van­dal­ism.

“We need to be a bit cau­tious about the ex­act lo­ca­tions of sites be­cause that could put them un­der threat.”

In­stead, he said, the aim is to in­crease pub­lic aware­ness of Trinidad and To­ba­go’s rich ar­chae­o­log­i­cal her­itage while en­sur­ing vul­ner­a­ble sites re­main pro­tect­ed.

Ac­cord­ing to the Na­tion­al Trust, there are more than 300 known ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sites through­out the coun­try.

“We’re talk­ing about from Cha­cachacare straight down to Ica­cos, so all dif­fer­ent ends of the spec­trum. To­ba­go has many ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sites as well.”

He said the Trust in­tends to in­spect each lo­ca­tion to de­ter­mine whether it still ex­ists, as­sess its con­di­tion and record any changes since it was first doc­u­ment­ed.

“We aim to check every sin­gle one of them and as­sess their in­tegri­ty, as­sess whether they still re­main, be­cause there might be in­stances where they have been com­plete­ly de­stroyed by de­vel­op­ment. We hope that is not the case for the ma­jor­i­ty of them.”

Mor­ris said the work re­cent­ly car­ried out in the Or­toire and Ma­yaro dis­trict rep­re­sents the be­gin­ning of the na­tion­wide ex­er­cise.

He not­ed that one of the first chal­lenges fac­ing ar­chae­ol­o­gists is sim­ply lo­cat­ing sites first record­ed decades ago.

Many were doc­u­ment­ed be­fore the ad­vent of Glob­al Po­si­tion­ing Sys­tem (GPS) and Ge­o­graph­ic In­for­ma­tion Sys­tem (GIS) tech­nol­o­gy. Mor­ris ex­plained: “So some of them we still have to lo­cate us­ing di­rec­tions and, if you’re talk­ing about 40 to 50 years ago, those di­rec­tions may have changed and there may have been de­vel­op­ment in the area.”

Once lo­cat­ed, ar­chae­ol­o­gists record pre­cise GIS co­or­di­nates be­fore eval­u­at­ing the site’s con­di­tion. “We’re as­sess­ing the in­tegri­ty of the site, whether it still ex­ists, what type of ma­te­r­i­al we can find there and any changes that have oc­curred dur­ing the in­ter­ven­ing pe­ri­od.”

Al­though Or­toire and Ma­yaro were se­lect­ed as the start­ing point, Mor­ris said the re­gion has long been recog­nised for its ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sig­nif­i­cance.

“That coast­line is syn­ony­mous with trav­el from the South Amer­i­can main­land to Trinidad.

“There are mul­ti­ple habi­ta­tion sites dot­ted along that coast and ev­i­dence of that.”

He said the Na­tion­al Trust al­so works close­ly with oth­er state agen­cies to en­sure ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sites are con­sid­ered be­fore de­vel­op­ment takes place.

While some ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sites are lo­cat­ed on ac­tive agri­cul­tur­al lands, Mor­ris ac­knowl­edged the need to bal­ance her­itage preser­va­tion with farm­ing.

“Agri­cul­ture is an is­sue be­cause, of course, when you’re plough­ing, you are dis­turb­ing the ar­chae­o­log­i­cal record,” he said. Rather than pre­vent­ing agri­cul­tur­al ac­tiv­i­ty, Mor­ris said the ob­jec­tive is to iden­ti­fy the coun­try’s most sig­nif­i­cant sites and en­sure plan­ning au­thor­i­ties are aware of them.

“We want to en­sure that the most im­por­tant ar­chae­o­log­i­cal sites are iden­ti­fied, and we al­so work very close­ly with the Town and Coun­try Plan­ning Di­vi­sion to en­sure it has the lo­ca­tions of these sites.”

He not­ed that the Na­tion­al Trust has al­so demon­strat­ed its com­mit­ment to pre­serv­ing sig­nif­i­cant sites through land ac­qui­si­tion where nec­es­sary.

Mor­ris point­ed to the Ban­wari Trace site in south Trinidad, recog­nised as one of the Caribbean’s most im­por­tant ar­chae­o­log­i­cal dis­cov­er­ies.

“The Ban­wari Trace ar­chae­o­log­i­cal site was iden­ti­fied as an ex­treme­ly im­por­tant site and, at that point in time, the Na­tion­al Trust and the Gov­ern­ment of the day worked with the landown­er and we were able to pre­serve the site.”

He said the Na­tion­al Trust cur­rent­ly man­ages three ma­jor her­itage prop­er­ties di­rect­ly—Mille Fleurs, Ban­wari Trace and the Five Is­lands, in­clud­ing Nel­son Is­land—all of which pos­sess sig­nif­i­cant his­tor­i­cal or ar­chae­o­log­i­cal val­ue.