Social anthropologist Luděk Brož: dedicated to the Altai Republic ****************************************************************************************** * Social anthropologist Luděk Brož: dedicated to the Altai Republic ****************************************************************************************** Having first travelled to the Altai Republic, a land in the middle of Siberia with wild la idiosyncratic inhabitants, Mgr. Luděk Brož, M.Phil., Ph.D. was so enchanted by the genius of the region that he abandoned his chemistry studies and became a social anthropologist. life’s passion, both scientific and personal. Now writing his doctoral thesis on the count at the CU Faculty of Humanities, he also works at the Ethnological Institute of the Academ the Czech Republic and edits popular anthropology texts for the Sociologické nakladatelstv Could you introduce the focus of your scientific interest? For many years now I have been working in the Altai Republic, which is a federal subject o Federation and the place where Russia borders Kazakhstan, China and Mongolia. Amongst othe region is interesting because it is there that, in the 1940s, archaeologists discovered, b the permafrost, preserved graves, approximately 2,500 years old, containing very well-pres various other organic materials such as wood, skin and clothing. Together with a large col objects also found in the graves, these are now prized exhibits at the St. Petersburg Herm the finds were also horses that had been sacrificed during the burial process. However, ey that village dogs ate pieces of the horses during the excavations. At the start of the 199 100 kilometres away, archaeologists from Novosibirsk found more graves from the same cultu peculiar that no major study had been carried out in a location of such archaeological sig locals I was in contact with didn’t want to hear about the archaeologists, and the archaeo me that they didn’t want to work in the area because they feared for their lives; apparent drove them away with sticks. In addition to this, the authorities had passed laws making c difficult for archaeological research, and they were completely banned from some areas of I wanted to know why, which is how I came to study the topic that has occupied me for so l variability of local perceptions of archaeology and the causes of this. Why do the Altai not like archaeological research? The people there have their own specific habits and beliefs about burial. Altais mostly on for the burial, then seven to nine days, and then a year, afterwards, and that’s it. Furth are buried one after another in cemeteries in the order they die, so you won’t find any fa From their point of view a grave is not, in short, a place you should regularly visit and quite the opposite, in fact. The Altais say that interfering with graves, including the ol archaeologists are interested in, will only release dangerous forces. In their opinion, an of every person is a certain, separable entity, called süne in the Altai language, which I as ‘spirit-double’; when a person loses this, they remain incomplete and slowly edge towar is a variety of ways a person can lose their süne, for example someone or something can ta them. And it is for precisely this reason that people are scared in relation to disturbing dead. The way they see it, the archaeologists come, do their work, get paid for it and go the negative consequences of their actions are borne by the locals. All of this plays out in a climate where Altai intellectuals, and indeed the whole local c in the past twenty years, been turning to its history as a certain kind of legitimisation and future of its own culture. Paradoxically, archaeology plays a somewhat schizophrenic r this: if you want to trace the history of a culture that was, essentially, not written unt 17th century, archaeological sources are a crucial source for ideas about national identit local intellectuals, on the one hand, use archaeological discoveries to demonstrate how so inhabitants of Altai were two thousand years ago, but on the other hand, if they do not wa the inhabitants of remote, rural regions, they must respond to the fears of archaeology, w itself in concepts such the protection of cultural heritage. However, a large number of the people that I work with are not interested in abstract cult but in the fact that someone is harming them by excavating graves right next door to their small number of Altai blamed the major earthquake of 2003 on the archaeologists. How are you accepted by the locals? I went to the Altai Republic several times during my studies. The beginnings of my relatio place really started to develop during the summer of 1998, when I spent three months there really bad time because the rouble was being devalued, the locals didn’t have any money at know how they were going to feed their children. Then I arrived imagining that I could wor while collecting data for my studies. However, I didn’t know how to behave in this situati to work and not eat much (laughs). I worked in the forest; we built a whole house out of w helped prepare the hay for winter. After working in the forest, scything seemed quite easy fact that, during this difficult period, I became involved with the normal life of the loc gained not only contacts, but also a certain amount of credit, which I still draw on. In 2 lived in one village for a whole year, gathering data for my dissertation and finally lear Altai to a decent level. This was essential, because the study of a de facto bilingual pop command of both languages, that is, Russian and Altai. You received your doctorate from Cambridge. How difficult was it to be admitted to such a university? Actually it wasn’t all that difficult – paradoxically, it was maybe easier than studying a prestigious British university, because at Cambridge they can help you with the financing studies. If they want you, they can help you find a variety of funds. All you have to do i the application process. I should also say that, at the time when I was applying to study Republic wasn’t yet a member of the European Union, so tuition fees for Czechs were much h they are now. And why did they want you in particular? I had found my own future supervisor, Professor Caroline Humphrey, who was one of the firs from the West to travel to those parts of Siberia while the Soviet Union still existed, an monograph about it. She was a massive influence on my work and also ensured that I found m studies at Cambridge. After completing your postgraduate studies you moved to Germany, where you worked at the M Institute. What drew you to continue your scientific career in Germany? I wanted to gather work, as well as study, experience. There was a vacancy at the Max Plan it was a good opportunity. I accepted it, with all the pros and cons that it entailed. I h joint projects, which meant I had to put my own research on the backburner a bit; however, lot of new things and gathered enough material for another book – but first I’ll have to w one (laughs). Getting a post-doctorate grant from the Czech Grant Agency has now allowed m the original topic of my scientific interest. Apart from my own monograph I am also prepar with my fellow anthropologists from abroad, a comparative study of suicide, a topic that h been underappreciated and neglected in anthropology. In the Altai Republic, however, I cou because the suicide rate is, unfortunately, very high and, according to many of the people the course of my research, partly because of archaeology.