{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017324350336862367, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010587102983638113, 'mean_word_length': 5.341463414634147, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Interpreting the Meaning of East Baltic Neolithic Symbols

Three sets of symbolic material from sites of the East Baltic Neolithic non-Corded Ware culture c. 6500–3500 bp are presented and compared in order to interpret certain aspects of the ideology of these prehistoric communities, specifically as it relates to their faunal environment and gender distinctions. Approaches taken consist of: 1) statistical analysis of a data base of anthropomorphic and zoomorphic symbols, and grave good inventories as they relate to gender; 2) comparison of frequencies of faunal types represented in the economy and in zoomorphic symbols; and 3) a cross-cultural comparison of contexts of the most frequently occurring Neolithic animal symbols in East Baltic historic mythology, folkore, and ethnography. It is hoped that the results of these multiple and varied approaches can serve as a middle ground between vague abstract theorizing about Neolithic ideology on the one hand, and a wealth of infrequently addressed symbolic material on the other.