Abstract

This paper examines the representation of gender in the archaeological discourse on the Botai Eneolithic culture in northern Kazakhstan and the impact of these representations on the wider narrative on the Eurasian steppe. While the Botai culture is frequently cited as a key case in discussions of horse domestication and Eneolithic social complexity in the region, analyses of its social dynamics frequently rely on interpretive frameworks that embed assumptions about gender, power, and agency.

In this study, the representation of gender in the discourse on the Botai culture will be explored using qualitative research methods on sixteen open-access publications in Russian and English. This research identifies recurring patterns in how scholars distribute agency, authority, and symbolic meaning in reconstructions of the Botai past. The analysis shows that men are more often described as central historical actors, such as leaders, innovators, and ritual specialists, while women are more frequently associated with domestic activity, fertility symbolism, or supportive roles. In several texts, gender itself is treated as an obvious or secondary category, even in contexts where labor organization, ritual practice, and social structure are central to interpretation. These representations are not derived from the archaeological evidence itself. Instead, they reflect interpretive framework and long-standing disciplinary approach that shape how material remains are translated into social narratives. By situating Botai literature within broader debates in gender-aware archaeology, the paper demonstrates how traditional narrative bias, such as active men and passive women, become normalized and reproduced, even when the material record is ambiguous.

The paper also examines how institutional and disciplinary conventions shape interpretive results, including patterns of citation, the marginal presence of gender-focused scholarship, and the tendency to treat gender as self-evident rather than as a subject of examination.

The research advocates for more reflexive approaches to gender in steppe archaeology. Making underlying assumptions explicit and testing alternative interpretations can produce richer and more accurate understandings of social life in Eneolithic Central Eurasia. Re-examining Botai archaeology through this lens not only complicates established narratives of early pastoral societies but also highlights how interpretations of the past continue to reflect the intellectual traditions of the present.