Problems of Interpretation
The interpretation of archaeological finds from the Harappan civilization poses significant challenges, particularly in reconstructing their religious practices. Early archaeologists often attributed religious significance to objects that appeared unfamiliar, such as terracotta figurines of women and rare stone sculptures of men commonly referred to as 'mother goddesses' and 'priest-kings.' Structures like the Great Bath and fire altars were also considered to have ritual importance.
Efforts to understand religious beliefs through seals depicting ritual scenes or animal motifs that suggest nature worship tend to draw on parallels with later religious traditions. However, this approach is speculative, as artifacts like seals showing a figure in a yogic posture, thought to represent early forms of deities like Shiva, lack direct contemporary references.
The presumed connections made by archaeologists often arise from analogies with known practices, presenting issues when it comes to defining 'proto-Shiva' seals versus how such figures were understood in ancient texts like the Rigveda, which mentions Rudra—a god that does not align with later representations of Shiva. Thus, the nuances of Harappan religious practice remain largely interpretive, drawing upon limited contextual frameworks rather than clear narratives. With many reconstructions being speculative, uncertainties remain regarding the actual religious life of the Harappans, illustrating the complexity of interpreting ancient civilizations.