Abstract This paper explores the importance and implications of a multivocal and ethnographic approach to archaeological praxis and interpretation of artefacts. Drawing from post-colonial and archaeological disenfranchisement perspectives, an attempt has been made to review the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and other agencies’ strategies and their resultant hegemonic dominance over archaeological sites and narratives, thus marginalizing local and indigenous narratives and knowledge systems. Focusing on certain Jain heritage sites of Purulia, biased conservation and preservation strategies have been observed along with the collection of neighbouring local community narratives which revealed a sense of apathy towards archaeological authorities along with a sense of pride towards the material revealing the disenfranchisement of material heritage. The paper thus explicates the importance of the inclusion of multivocality and ethnographic methodologies into the archaeological praxis, allowing for the inclusion of minority narratives and recognizing the importance of multiple ontologies and epistemes.
Mundrol et al. (Wed,) studied this question.