Anthropology as a discipline emerged during the Enlightenment era of the 17th and 18th centuries to study human beings and society. The earlier scholars used secondary sources and hence are called ‘arm-chair’ anthropologists. As the discipline grew, its methodology evolved as well from analysing secondary sources to conducting ‘fieldwork’ through ‘participant observation’ and ‘holistic approach’. During the 20th century, the fundamental premise of anthropological methodology became dominated by ‘ethnographic fieldwork’ and the practice of ‘Being there’ among the community under study. Over the years, the scope of anthropological research and its disciplinary sub-branches has expanded to cover new aspects of ever-changing society and culture, such as urban anthropology, visual anthropology, etc. As a result, traditional methods of conducting fieldwork are no longer adequate to cater to the needs of the expanding nature of the discipline. Changes in methodologies have also occurred due to technological advancements. For instance, Margaret Mead used photographic techniques to study the Balinese people of Indonesia in 1936. The dynamic nature of the discipline is also impacted by significant events, such as the Covid-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, conducting fieldwork traditionally became unfeasible. Consequently, it altered the nature of anthropological fieldwork, leading to the adoption of more flexible methods like digital fieldwork and enhancing the study of cultures from a distance. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the methodological changes in anthropological fieldwork over the years, especially focusing on the recent developments during the Covid 19 and post-Covid 19 period. The paper will utilize secondary sources of data and the personal experiences of the authors and their peers to understand how changing times, unforeseen events, and the growing scope of a discipline call for changes in methodology as well.