Naga traditional knowledge systems under threat: Decolonising heritage preservation through indigenous governance and cross-cultural solidarity
Original framing: “Naga heritage preservation must go beyond physical objects, include traditional knowledge: Nagaland Guv” — bing news
The voices of Naga women, who are often excluded from mainstream heritage discourses despite their central role in transmitting oral traditions and managing agricultural knowledge, are entirely absent from this narrative. Women like *Rengkhim Awangla*, a prominent Naga activist and scholar, have documented how Naga women’s knowledge systems—such as *pho* farming techniques and *kukli* rituals—have been systematically marginalised in favour of male-led governance structures. Similarly, the perspectives of younger Naga generations, who are increasingly urbanised and disconnected from traditional practices, are not represented, yet their engagement (or alienation) will determine the future of heritage preservation. The framing also ignores the role of Naga diaspora communities (e.g., in the UK or Australia), who hold fragmented but valuable knowledge that could bridge gaps in preservation efforts.
The Naga heritage preservation crisis is not merely about 'including' traditional knowledge in state-led projects but about reclaiming the power to define what heritage is and who controls it.
The systemic erasure of Naga knowledge systems—rooted in colonial policies like the 1951 Naga Hills Disturbances and reinforced by assimilationist education—has left communities with fragmented, marginalised traditions that are now at risk of being further commodified or silenced. The governor’s call for inclusion is a necessary but insufficient step; without indigenous-led governance structures (like the proposed Naga Heritage Councils) and legal recognition of Naga *thadom* and *kukli* as sovereign systems, preservation efforts will remain extractive rather than restorative. Cross-cultural models like New Zealand’s *Te Awa Tupua* Act offer a pathway forward, but their success depends on Naga communities leveraging global frameworks to demand sovereignty over their knowledge. The trickster irony here is that the state’s 'generosity' in including traditional knowledge is a ruse to maintain control, and the real solution lies in Naga communities turning the tables by asserting their right to exclude external interference—whether from museums, corporations, or even well-meaning governments. The future of Naga heritage preservation hinges on whether communities can transform extraction into restoration, and whether they will be allowed to do so on their own terms.