FUNERARY MONUMENTS OF THE SARGAT CULTURE OF THE MIDDLE IRTYSH REGION: GENDER ANALYSIS*

The article is devoted to poorly studied problems related to the reconstruction of gender relations in ancient societies. The funerary monuments of the Sargat culture of the Middle Irtysh region (VI century BC-Ill/IVe. AD) were analyzed. The application of the previously unused approach, according to which the buried person and the accompanying artifacts are considered as a single "ensemble", allowed us to make assumptions about the gender structure of Sargat society and the gender stereotypes that existed in it.

Key words: gender archeology, burial rites, Sargat culture, Early Iron Age," ensemble " of artifacts.

Introduction

The concept of gender and its relation to biological sex has been widely discussed in sociology and psychology [Bern, 2007]. The main idea here is to distinguish between biological sex and social gender. Gender (male or female) is biologically determined by a set of chromosomes; gender is created within society, is a socio-biological characteristic of the individual, and is "culturally instilled" from early childhood, when children begin to learn gender roles - sets of expected patterns of behavior (norms) for men and women.

The gender stereotype reflects a well-established opinion about the personal qualities of a group of people. In essence, these are social norms, i.e. the basic rules that determine a person's behavior in society, regulate what kind of behavior and appearance are considered correct for a representative of a particular gender category [Ibid., pp. 33-34]. Gender stereotypes and patterns undoubtedly played a huge role in the life of ancient collectives. The appearance of an individual (his clothing, weapons, accessories, tattoos, etc.) was determined primarily by his gender, vertical social status**, and probably belonging to an ethnic group. In the absence of centralized governance and written laws, gender stereotypes, including visually fixed ones, must have been unusually strong. Their transformation was probably slow and painful.

* The paper was prepared as part of a comprehensive integration project of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences with financial support from the Russian Foundation for Scientific Research (project No. 08 - 01 - 85118a/U).

** Vertical social status is a term widely used in Anglo-American archaeology to describe the position of an individual in society, it is associated with the level occupied by a person in the social hierarchy (leader, community member, slave, etc.); horizontal social status reflects membership in a community, belonging to a clan or clan [Parker Pearson, 1999, p. 74].

The study of gender relations in the pre-written period of history is a significant problem. In the vast majority of cases, funerary monuments are the main source of information. Modern archaeology recognizes the fundamental possibility of studying gender through material culture [Nelson, 1997; Sorensen. 2000] (for more details, see Sharapova and Berseneva, 2006, pp. 29-33). The gender of the deceased can be reflected in an archaeological source through the location of the burial site in space, the structure of the burial structure, and the composition of the accompanying inventory. At the same time, if the first two positions may not have a gender connotation, then the placement of artifacts in a burial by gender is one of the few aspects that are well recorded archaeologically.

In the world of archeology and ethnography, there are many examples where the gender of the deceased was reflected in the funerary sphere through certain objects or/and a combination of them. As a rule, these objects are associated with the construction of "femininity" or" masculinity " accepted in society, and can symbolize the roles performed by individuals of different genders. For example, " a man may be buried with a quiver reflecting his activities as a hunter and warrior; with a vessel reflecting his adult status as a person who drinks with other adult men... A woman can be buried with beads reflecting her status as an unmarried girl; with stones for making fire reflecting her status as a wife; with a terochnik reflecting her status as a mother " [Ucko, 1969, p. 265]. According to cross-cultural ethnographic studies by L. Binford and K. According to Carr, it is precisely the gender identity of the buried person that determines his orientation in the grave and the set of accompanying equipment [Binford, 1971; Carr, 1995].

The aim of this work is to interpret the monuments of Sarghat culture from a gender perspective and, if possible, reconstruct the gender relations that existed in Sarghat society.

Analysis of funerary monuments of the Sargat culture of the Middle Irtysh region (VI century BC-III / IV century AD)

Monuments of the Sargat culture have been actively studied over the past decades; the excavation materials were included in generalizing works [Polos'mak, 1987; Koryakova, 1988; Matveeva, 1993, 1994, 2000; Khabdulina, 1994]. The works of L. N. Koryakova [1988, 1994, 1997], L. I. Pogodin [1988, 1997], and N. P. Matveeva [2000] made a significant contribution to social research.

The Sarghat population lived in permanent settlements. The basis of the economy, apparently, was cattle breeding. Burials were made in pits under mounds surrounded by one or more moats. The funeral rite was sufficiently unified: a stable position and orientation of the buried, the obligatory presence of dishes and / or remnants of meat food in the accompanying inventory. The deceased were often accompanied by weapons, details of the horse's bridle, jewelry, household items. Despite the variety of artefacts found in Sargat burials, there are practically no tools in them.

Recently, more and more researchers of Sargat antiquities are inclined to believe that the "kurgan population" is selective (Koryakova and Buldashev, 1997, p. 137). This is evidenced by the far from normal demographic profile of this population, as well as the obvious discrepancy between the number of people buried in mounds and the number of people who could have lived in modern settlements (Razhev and Kovrigin, 1999). Many traditional societies are characterized by the simultaneous existence of different ways of handling the dead, and the Sarghat culture is no exception. Apparently, a significant part of the dead were not buried in the mounds. This sample is selective, and the criteria for postmortem selection are unknown. Accordingly, below we will talk about the part of the population that was buried in the mounds, later discovered and studied.

Materials of all currently excavated Sargat funerary monuments of the Middle Irtysh region (26 burial grounds)were used for analysis* , with the exception of some very poorly documented ones (Figure 1).

The burial mounds were used to bury the dead of both sexes and different age groups, including children. Of the 191 undisturbed graves, 6 (31%) are cenotaphs, 65 (34.1%) are children and adolescents, and 120 are adults: 47 (24.6%) are men, 40 (20.9%) are women, and 33 (17.3%) are gender undetermined. Male burials are quantitatively higher than female burials: among adult burials whose gender is determined, 54% are men, 46% are women. Similar data are given in the work of D. I. Razhev: 59.6% of men and 41.4% of women [2001, Table 1], counting from the number of adults buried. Within individual monuments, the ratio of male and female burials can vary significantly**.

* I express my sincere gratitude to L. I. Pogodin and A. Ya. Trufanov for the opportunity to use unpublished materials from their excavations.

** Interestingly, almost the same ratio was found for early Sarmatians (Pokrovka burial ground): of the 174 identified skeletons, 35% were female and 65% were male (Davis - Kimball, 1998, p.142).

1. Localization of Sargat burial grounds in the Middle Irtysh region. 1-Okunevo II; 2-Okunevo Sha; 3-Setkulovo; 4-Artyn; 5-Kartashevo I; 6-Kartashevo II; 7-Beshaul III; 8-Beshaul II; 9-Beshaul IV; 10 - Strizhevo I; 11-Strizhevo II; 12-Isakovka I; 13 - Isakovka III; 14-Sidorovka; 15-Saratovo; 16-Bogdanovo III; 17-Bogdanovo I; 18-Bogdanovo II; 19-Novoobolon; 20-Gornaya Bitiya; 21-Krasnoyarsk; 22-Kokonovka I; 23-Kokonovka II, III; 24-Kalachevka II; 25-Starokarasuk.

The question of the existence and, accordingly, the composition of male and female "burial sets" has been repeatedly raised by researchers of Sargat monuments. L. N. Koryakova [1988, p. 55-56] statistically established that the composition of funeral equipment was primarily determined by the sex of the deceased under the influence of other social factors. The women's set included a mirror, beads, vessels and a spinning wheel, the men's set included items of weapons and horse harness, but the children's set was not specifically identified. V. A. Mogilnikov, on the contrary, noted the monotony of the burial inventory, which " makes it difficult to distinguish between the sex and age of the buried." According to his observations, men's burials contain "items of weapons, tools, details of horse equipment, individual jewelry, belt and quiver hooks and buckles"; women's and children's burials contain jewelry and tools [Mogilnikov, 1992, p. 300]. According to N. P. Matveeva, the inventory (in its complex) can serve as an "indicator of the sex of the buried". She identified approximately the same sex markers as the previous authors, excluding tools as characteristic features of male burials (Matveeva, 1993). In one of the last works of N. P. Matveeva, using cluster analysis methods, found that " the main categories of inventory correlate with the sex of the buried person as follows: the location of the knife and spinning wheel are indifferent signs, weapons and belt buckles are mainly male. Beads and earrings were women's accessories in the early period... but in the final stage, all the main types of jewelry become gender-neutral" [2000, p. 154]. She further noted that "putting a spinneret in a grave turned out to be a marker of the female sex, regardless of social status" [Ibid., p. 190].

Unfortunately, the application of statistical operations to burial materials does not always guarantee a more or less objective picture. As a rule, they provide a certain average model of female or male burial [Ibid., p. 188] and/or record a statistical correlation between a certain type of inventory and the sex of the buried person [Koryakova, 1988, p.54-56]. Relationship, for example, between the attributes "man" and "sword" (or between the attributes "many beads" and "woman") it is obvious, but it may give the impression that all men were buried with weapons, and all women with jewelry. Despite the undoubted benefits of a competent statistical correlation, the buried and the objects that accompanied them are separated in this case and are taken out of context. A certain statistical pattern is detected, which may not be justified when analyzing specific burials. Graves with "non-stereotypical" inventory or items that do not show a strict relationship with the gender or age (in the case of children) of the deceased are left out of brackets. In my opinion, in order to obtain convincing social reconstructions, statistical analysis must necessarily be supplemented with contextual analysis.

Table 1. Localization of undisturbed burials

An interesting approach was proposed by S. Lucy in his study of Anglo-Saxon cemeteries in Yorkshire (Lucy, 1997). He identified four "ensembles":: 1) all items of weapons; 2) jewelry; 3) artifacts that cannot be attributed to the first two categories, including dishes and animal bones; 4) without preserved inventory. The first two don't overlap, and items from the neutral set are found in all three categories. For each burial, the corresponding "ensemble" was determined and a correlation was made between it and the sex of the buried person.

An attempt to apply this technique on Sargat materials yielded some interesting results. All the undisturbed burials of the Middle Irtysh region known to me (totaling 191) were taken for analysis, so that the statement of the absence or presence of an object in each particular case implies its deliberate exclusion from the funeral ensemble or inclusion in it. Unfortunately, there are too few such burials within a single burial mound, so the sample includes graves from different monuments. It is necessary to clarify that in the absolute majority they are peripheral (tab. 1), since the central ones are almost all looted. But thanks to the individuality of the peripheral burials, the ownership of things to a particular individual was not in doubt.

It should be noted that the correlation between the types of accompanying inventory and the floor of the buried person, made at one time by L. N. Koryakova [1988], in principle, has not lost its relevance. Indeed, women were never buried with swords and protective armor; these items are associated exclusively with men. Therefore, inventory sets confirming traditional gender stereotypes were considered to be: for men - items of weapons and horse bridles, for women-a large number of metal and glass jewelry**.

First of all, burials with an "ensemble" of artefacts "weapons"were singled out. It includes all items of weapons (melee and remote combat weapons, protective armor) and horse harness parts. This group includes burials containing at least one of these items (Fig. 2, c). Further (from the remaining ones), burials with an "ensemble" of "jewelry" artifacts were identified, i.e. containing more than 20 beads and/or at least a couple of metal ornaments (Fig. 3, b). The next group consisted of graves with a neutral set of items that did not fall into the first two categories: vessels, animal bones, household knives, clothing buckles, individual ornaments, spinning rods, etc. (see Fig. 2, b). The conventionality of such a division is understandable, but the clarity of the conclusions set out below demonstrates that the distortion could not have been significant. A separate group consisted of burials without preserved artifacts. It is easy to see that the first" ensemble " is traditionally associated with men, and the second-with women.

In order to avoid possible inaccuracies, two variants of calculations were carried out. In the first (A), all burials (191) were taken into account, including children's, collective and cenotaphs; in the second (B), only individual burials of adults with children were taken into account.-

* N. P. Matveeva suggests at least one exception: in mound 35 of the Staro-Lybaevsky-4 burial ground (Pritobolye), the central burial contained fragments of a bone carapace and a sword, and skeletal remains from it were previously determined to belong to a woman over 25 years old. However, the number of bones preserved in the burial is small, and the skull was absent [Novye pamyatniki..., 2003, p. 108, figs. 54-56]. Without calling into question the correctness of the anthropological conclusion, I believe, however, that in such cases it is necessary to conduct several independent examinations.

** The question of what counts as "a lot of jewelry" is quite complex. Single piercings, beads, an earring or a ring could equally complement the appearance of both men and women. However, when dozens or hundreds of beads, bracelets, or paired earrings were found, in the absence of weapons, such sets were classified as an " ensemble "of" jewelry " artifacts.

2. Mound 3 of the Isakovka III burial ground (according to Pogodin and Trufanov, 1991).

a-plan and section of the mound: 1-9-burial numbers; b-8: 1 border plan, 3-vessels, 2-iron knife, 4-ceramic spinning wheel; c - 1: 1 border plan-bone clasp, 2-iron knife and animal bones, 3-end plates bow plates, 4-iron dagger, 5, 6, 8-bone arrowheads (9 copies), 7-vessel, 9-horse skull.

3. Mound 2 of the Isakovka III burial ground (according to Pogodin and Trufanov, 1991).

a-plan and section of the mound: 1-7-burial numbers; b-border plan 2: 1, 2, 10-vessels, 3-ceramic spinning wheel, 4-8, 11, 12-glass beads (total 288 copies), 9-ceramic dish, 13-animal bones, 14-iron knife, 15, 16-bronze plaques, 11-bronze hairpin.

Table 2. The ratio of" ensembles " of artefacts calculated according to variant A

Table 3. The ratio of" ensembles " of artifacts calculated by option B

See Table 4. Correlation of" ensembles " of artefacts in male and female burials

biological sex (87 graves)*. Both variants represent the distribution of burials by" ensembles "of artifacts, with one" ensemble " always corresponding to one burial.

As a result of grouping according to option A (191 grave sites), it turned out that approximately half (95, or 49.7%) of the burials did not contain weapons or a large number of ornaments, i.e. things that could more or less unambiguously indicate the gender of the deceased. These are graves with a neutral "ensemble". Burials with weapons accounted for just over a third (61, or 31.1%), and with ornaments - even less (23, or 12%).

Comparison of inventory "ensembles" with the results of biological sex identification allowed us to obtain the following results (Table 2). More than half of burials with weapons are men's; women's and children's burials together account for 27.4%. This fact is not surprising, since it is generally characteristic of Early Iron Age burial mounds in the forest-steppe and steppe zones of Eurasia. Approximately equal numbers of adult and child burials with a neutral "ensemble" were recorded. Interestingly, most of the cenotaphs also belong to this category. In the group with the "ensemble" of artefacts "ornaments", the majority are adult burials. In two cases, these are male burials, but of course, women predominate. The "no inventory" category is relatively small (only 12). All groups of buried people are represented here in almost equal proportions, but children are a minority relative to all adults.

When calculating according to option B (87 graves) the absolute indicators are somewhat different (Table 3). The changes are quite predictable. Among adult burials with weapons, the proportion of both male and female burials increased from 53.2% to 79.5% and from 12.9% to 20.5%, respectively. The percentage of male burials also increased in groups with a neutral set (from 12.5% to 36.4%) and with an "ensemble" of artefacts "ornaments" (from 8.7% to 18.2%).

Distribution of artefact" ensembles " within the "men" and "women" categories (tab. 4) for now-

* Anthropological definitions were made by V. A. Dremov, A. N. Bagashev, and D. I. Razhev.

This indicates that among male burials, weapons are dominant (31 vs. 16), and among female burials - with a neutral set, although with a slight preponderance (21 vs. 19). In general, there are few uninvented burials, and, as noted above, they are quite evenly distributed among different gender and age categories. Apparently, they do not form a single whole, i.e. they do not characterize any social group.

Discussion

According to the results of grouping burials by" ensembles " of artefacts, it turns out that at least 46% (40 graves) Of the total number of people buried, they demonstrate a certain relationship between the gender of the deceased and the accompanying inventory: a man - weapons (31 grave sites), a woman - jewelry (9 graves). Interestingly, to a much greater extent, this applies to men: at least 60% of men's burials contained some kind of weapons. A large amount of jewelry was recorded only in 22.5% of women's graves. About 20% of women's burials contained separate items of weapons and / or horse harness, while the rest of the "ensembles" look neutral.

The explanation of the above facts only by the possibility of errors in identifying the sex of some buried persons is not convincing enough. The unavoidable margin of error averages up to 12% (Parker Pearson, 1999; Bello et al., 2006). But if we reject the correctness of gender identification in these cases, then we need to question other definitions, including those burials where gender stereotypes are fully respected.

Interestingly, a similar pattern is observed in Anglo-Saxon archaeology. In different cemeteries, 30 to 60% of burials did not contain items that could be directly related to the sex (gender) of the deceased [Lucy, 1997; Harke, 2004]. Unfortunately, it is not easy to get such information from publications on Scythian and Sarmatian monuments that are closer in all respects. E. P. Bunyatyan estimated that 97.4% of Scythian male burials and at least half of female burials contained weapons [1985, pp. 91-92]. However, since the gender of most of the buried people was determined by the researcher on the basis of the accompanying inventory, these figures probably do not reflect the actual ratio. But the very fact of the presence of weapons in Scythian female burials is beyond doubt. A 20-25 - year-old woman was buried in mound 7 of the Novozavedenie II burial ground, accompanied by weapons, including fragments of a sword, spear, axe, combat knife, as well as arrowheads and horse harness parts. Along with this, the grave also contained traditional items for women's burials: two spinning wheels, many beads made of glass, amber, carnelian, faience and jet [Petrenko, Maslov, Kantorovich, 2004, pp. 184-186]. In general, according to E. E. Fialko, 25% of Scythian burials with weapons are women's (see: [Ibid., p. 195]).

Not so long ago, the data on the number of "Sauromatic" (VI - early IV century BC) women buried with weapons were revised (Strizhak, 2007). As a result, it turned out that the prevailing opinion about the "belligerence" of early nomad women is greatly exaggerated. Among the female graves that have anthropological definitions, only a few contained single arrowheads and one contained a dagger. In the sample of early Sarmatians, approximately 11% of burials with weapons were identified by anthropologists as female (20 out of 176 graves). [Ibid., p. 75]. According to D. Davis-Kimball's calculations, up to 94% of Sarmatian male burials and at least 15% of female burials on the Pokrovka monument contained weapons (Davis-Kimball, 1998, p. 143). Unfortunately, the literature does not analyze burials of people with a gender-neutral set of artifacts, although it is obvious from the publications of the excavation materials that they exist (see, for example: [Vedder et al., 1993; Yablonsky, Davis-Kimball, Demidenko, 1995; Antiquities..., 2006]).

Several female burials with weapons have been found on the monuments of the Pazyryk culture of Gorny Altai dating back to the Early Iron Age (IV-II centuries BC). With a 16-year-old girl (Ak-Alakha-1 burial ground) were placed an iron chased and dagger, a bow and a burning set with arrows. Moreover, she was dressed in men's clothing - a fur coat and trousers [Polos'mak, 2001, p. 58]. According to N. V. Polosmak, this situation can be considered unique, since Pazyryk women (including those buried in the "royal" mounds) were usually buried in women's outfits and only with jewelry and a set of dishes [Ibid., pp. 274-276]. It is interesting that a few burials with gender-neutral inventory are male (Ak-Alakha burial ground-5, mounds 3 and 5) [Ibid., pp. 94-97].

The above brief review is intended to demonstrate the general similarity of funerary ritual patterns among the "kurgan" cultures of the Early Iron Age of Eurasia. The presence of four "ensembles" of artifacts with some variations can be traced in the funerary monuments of each of them. It is especially significant that burials with gender-neutral equipment, as well as with artifacts that are characteristic of the opposite sex.-

both sexes seem to be pan-cultural. Accordingly, gender stereotypes in these societies may have had something in common. For studying the social structures of Sargat culture, the historical background is particularly important, since it allows, if not to fill in the gaps, then indirectly confirm some concepts in the absence of any sources other than archaeological ones.

Thus, adults * buried in Sargat mounds can be divided into four groups::

1. Buried with gender-stereotyped sets of inventory ("weapons", "jewelry") in accordance with their biological gender. This group makes up at least 46.0% of the total number (even excluding looted burials excluded from the sample for this analysis).

2. Buried with inventory sets that are more characteristic of the opposite sex. These are single male burials without weapons, with a large number of ornaments (two cases) and female burials with weapons (eight). This group is 11.5%.

3. Buried with gender-neutral inventory sets. This is a fairly large group (33.9%) with a predominance of women's graves (21 out of 33).

4. Buried without preserved inventory (four cases) - 4.6%.

The presence of the first group does not require explanation, because it corresponds to traditional ideas about the social roles of men and women. The second group usually causes the most controversy. Burials of men with ornaments are rare, and it is impossible to adequately interpret them. The previously proposed variants include a number of possibilities ranging from an" average "anthropological error to ritual "travestism" (Troitskaya, 1987). However, in view of the small number of such cases and the presence of discrepancies in the determination of gender, it is unlikely that any really convincing explanation can now be offered. As for female burials with weapons, they undoubtedly exist and their number in the Eurasian "kurgan" cultures of the early Iron Age varies on average from 10 to 25%. Based on historical and ethnographic data, many authors believe that the burial of women with "male" artifacts often indicates their elevated status [McHugh, 1999; Parker Pearson, 1999]. Medieval queens of Western Europe were buried with weapons and armor; this was also an indicator of their high status [McHugh, 1999]. Scythian female burials with weapons were found in elite mounds (Petrenko, Maslov, Kantorovich, 2004). Researchers often point out that stereotypes such as "a weapon means a man; a spinning wheel, beads means a woman" are often not justified in the context of individual monuments [McHugh, 1999, p.33].

Groups of people buried with neutral "ensembles" or no inventory at all could identify their gender identity without using material symbols that are strictly exclusive to each biological gender (or using easily destructible ones, such as clothing only). However, such burials usually have very modest burial structures. In other words, these are rather" poor " graves.

In addition, it is impossible to be sure that all the accompanying inventory belonged to the deceased personally (was his property) - it could be offerings both to the buried person himself, and to his ancestors or relatives who have already left for the other world, as well as to various deities and spirits. A funerary monument reflects the personal (and social) characteristics not only of the deceased, but also, to a large extent, of those who buried him.

Conclusions

In Sargat burial practice, the gender structure is reflected in the" ensembles " of artifacts accompanying at least half of the dead, as well as, to a lesser extent, in the localization of burials in space (women are three times less buried in the central graves than men). Weapons, horse bridles, and jewelry, although often directly related to the sex of the buried person, were not markers of biological sex as such. Rather, these items can be called gender markers. For women, the weapon may have symbolized their vertical social status. A significant number of female burials with weapons, as well as the number of burials of men, women and children with objects neutral to the biological sex confirms this. Gender characteristics, for all their undoubted importance, were obviously not the only ones in the selection of burial equipment.

The study made it possible to draw the following conclusions:

1. The gender structures of ancient societies, the norms and stereotypes inherent in them, were much more complex than it seems now, and were not reduced to a simple binary division into male warriors and female housewives.

* Separate works are devoted to the gender characteristics of children and adolescents [Berseneva, 2006, 2008].

2. Despite the fact that the funerary source most fully represents the gender category of male warriors, a significant number of men were buried with a neutral set of artifacts (at least 25% of the total number of male burials).

3. The differences between individuals buried with neutral and stereotypical inventory sets may need to be sought in the area of not only gender, but also vertical status relationships. The circumstances of the death may also have played a role. There is reason to assume that in Sargat women's graves, weapons are primarily a symbol of social status.

4. Assuming that the number of men and women in society should be approximately equal, the fact of an imbalance among the buried can be explained by the increased mortality of men due to their occupation, or by the peculiarities of burial practices that regulate the ways of separation for women, or by economic reasons when the family could not guarantee a complex burial for all women.

5. As for the social roles of men and women, the funeral rite does not give grounds to state their complete "disjointment". In some areas of life, not excluding management, production and military, they could be quite comparable. Although the range of objects found in women's burials is quite wide, in men's burials the inventory is generally more diverse. In this regard, it can be assumed that women's social roles in life were more limited (but also more stable) than men's.

List of literature

Bern S. Gender psychology: Laws of male and female behavior. St. Petersburg: Prime-EUROZNAK Publ., 2007, 318 p. (in Russian)

Bunatyan E. P. Methods of social reconstruction in archaeology: On the material of the Scythian burials of the IV - III centuries BC - Kiev: Nauk. dumka Publ., 1985, 228 p. (in Russian)

Vedder, J., Egorov, V., Davis-Kimball, J., Morgunova, N., Trunaeva, T., and Yablonsky, L., Excavations of the Pokrovka 2 and Pokrovka 8 burial grounds in 1992, Kurgany levoberezhnogo Ileka, Moscow: Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1993, issue 1, pp. 18-55.

Drevnosti Lebedevki (VI-II vv. B.C.) / B. F. Zhelezchikov, V. M. Klepikov, I. V. Sergatskov. - Moscow: Vostochny lit., 2006. - 159 p.

Koryakova L. N. Early Iron Age of the Trans-Urals and Western Siberia. Sverdlovsk: Ural State University Publishing House, 1988, 240 p.

Koryakova L. N. Ural-Irtysh forest-steppe // Essays on the cultural genesis of the peoples of Western Siberia. Tomsk: Publishing House of the Tomsk State University, 1994, vol. 2: The Real and Otherworldly World, pp. 113-169.

Koryakova L. N. Gaevsky burial ground in the context of the evolution of the Sargat cultural community / / Culture of trans-Ural cattle breeders at the turn of the era. - Yekaterinburg: Yekaterinburg, 1997. - pp. 138-154.

Koryakova L. N., Buldashev V. A. Pogrebal'naia obryadnost ' [Funeral rituals] / / Kul'tura zauralskikh skotovodov na rubezhe er. - Yekaterinburg: Yekaterinburg, 1997. - pp. 130-137.

Matveeva N. P. Sargat culture in the middle Tobol. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1993, 175 p. (in Russian)

Matveeva N. P. Early Iron Age of the Ishim region. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1994, 160 p. (in Russian)

Matveeva N. P. Socio-economic structures of the population of Western Siberia in the Early Iron Age (forest-steppe and subtaiga zones). Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 2000, 399 p. (in Russian)

Mogilnikov V. A. Sargat culture // Steppe strip of the Asian part of the USSR in the Scythian-Sarmatian time. - Moscow: Nauka, 1992. - pp. 292-312. - (Archeology of the USSR).

New monuments of the Bronze and Early Iron Ages: (Antiquities of the Ingal Valley: An Archaeological and paleogeographic study) / N. P. Matveeva, E. N. Volkov, N. E. Ryabogina. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 2003, issue 1, 174 p.

Petrenko V. G., Maslov V. E., Kantorovich A. R. Pogrebenie znatnoi scifianki iz mogilnika Novozavedennoe-II (predvaritel'naya publichatsiya) [The burial of a noble Scythian woman from the Novozavedennoe - II burial ground (preliminary publication)]. Arheologicheskie pamyatniki rannego zheleznogo veka Yuga Rossii [Archaeological monuments of the Early Iron Age of the South of Russia], Moscow: Izd. Inst.of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2004, pp. 179-210.

Pogodin L. I. K kharakteristike pogrebalnogo obryada sargatskoy kul'tury [On the characteristics of the burial rite of the Sargat culture]. Omsk: Omsk State University, 1988, pp. 27-37.

Pogodin L. I. K kharakteristike voennoi struktury sargatskoy obshchnosti [On the characteristics of the military structure of the Sargat community]. IV istoricheskie chteniya pamyati M. P. Gryaznov: (Materials of the Scientific Conference), Omsk: Publishing House of Omsk State University, 1997, pp. 116-121.

Pogodin L. I., Trufanov A. Ya. Sargat culture burial ground Isakovka III // Ancient burials of the Ob-Irtysh region. Omsk: Publishing House of the Omsk State University, 1991, pp. 98-127.

Polos'mak N. V. Baraba in the Early Iron Age. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1987, 144 p. (in Russian)

Polos'mak N. V. The Riders of Ukok. Novosibirsk: INFOLIO-press, 2001, 336 p. (in Russian)

Razhev D. I. Naselenie lesostepi Zapadnoy Sibiri rannego zheleznogo veka: rekonstruktsiya antropologicheskikh osobennostei [Population of the forest-steppe of Western Siberia in the Early Iron Age: reconstruction of anthropological features]. Yekaterinburg, 2001, 22 p. (in Russian)

Razhev D. I., Kovrigin A. A. Kurgan burial grounds of Sargat culture and socio-demographic structure of ancient society // Ecology of ancient and modern societies: tez. dokl. - Tyumen: Publishing House of the Institute of Problems of Development of the North of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1999. - pp. 171-175.

Strizhak M. S. On women's burials with weapons of nomads of the Urals and Volga region in the VI-beginning of the IV century BC / / Armament of the Sarmatians: regional typology and chronology: dokl. k VI Mezhdunar. Conf. "Problems of Sarmatian archeology and history". Chelyabinsk: Publishing House of the South Ural State University, 2007, pp. 71-75.

Troitskaya T. N. The phenomenon of travestism in the Scythian-Siberian world / / Scythian-Siberian world: Art and Ideology. Novosibirsk: Nauka Publ., 1987, pp. 59-63.

Khabdulina M. K. Steppe Priishimye in the era of early iron. Almaty: Gylym Rakurs Publ., 1994, 170 p. (in Russian)

Sharapova S. V., Berseneva N. A. Social symbolism: the system of concepts and problems of studying // The Urals. history. vestn. - 2006. - N 14. - p. 25-35.

Yablonsky, L. T., Davies-Kimball, J., and Demidenko, Yu. V., Excavations of the Pokrovka 1 and Pokrovka 2 burial mounds in 1994, Kurgany levoberezhnogo Ileka, Moscow: Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1995, issue 3, pp. 9-47.

Bello S.M., Thomann A., Signoli M., Dutour O., Andrews P. Age and Sex Bias in the Reconstruction of Past Population Structure // Am. J. of Physical Anthropology. - 2006. - N 129. - P. 24-38.

Berseneva N. Archaeology of Children: Sub-adult Burials during the Iron Age in the Trans-Urals and Western Siberia // The Archaeology of Cult and Death. - Budapest: Archaeolingua, 2006. - P. 179 - 192.

Berseneva N. Women and Children in the Sargat Culture // Are All Warriors Male? Gender Roles on the Ancient Eurasian Steppe. - N.Y.: AltaMira Press, 2008. - Ch. 7. - P. 131-151.

Binford L.R. Mortuary practices: their study and their potential // An Archaeological Perspective. - N.Y.: Seminar Press, 1971. - P. 209 - 243.

Carr C. Mortuary practices: their social, philosophical-religious, circumstantial, and physical determinants // J. of Archaeological Method and Theory. - 1995. - N 2. - P. 105-200.

Davis-Kimball J. Statuses of Eastern Iron Age Nomads // Papers from the EAA Third Annual Meeting at Ravenna 1997. - Oxford: Archaeopress, 1998. - Vol. 1: Pre- and Protohistory. - P. 142 - 149. - (BAR; N 717).

Harke H. The Anglo-Saxon weapon burial rite: an interdisciplinary analysis // OPUS: Interdisciplinary Research in Archeology, Moscow: Publishing House of the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2004, issue 3, pp. 197-207.

Lucy S.J. Housewives, warrior and slaves? Sex and gender in Anglo-Saxon burials // Invisible People and Processes: Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology. - L.: Leicester University Press, 1997. - P. 150 - 168.

McHugh F. Theoretical and quantitative approaches to the study of mortuary practice. - Oxford: Archaeopress, 1999. - 152 p. - (BAR; N 785).

Nelson S.M. Gender in Archaeology: Analyzing Power and Prestige. - Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press, 1997. - 197 p.

Parker Pearson M. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. - Stroud: Sutton publishing limited, 1999. - 250 p.

Sorensen M.L.S. Gender Archaeology. - Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000. - 225 p.

Ucko P.J. Ethnography and the archaeological interpretation of funerary remains // World Archaeology. - 1969. - N 1. - P. 262-290.

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 01.07.08.

Permanent link to this publication: