>>1621>So ancient gods have a larger symbolic value and so better for said rituals?
As far as rituals go they seem like opportunists.
There's a bit in Gilgamesh. The epic contains a story-within-a-story, the story of Utnapishtim, an earlier Noah figure.
The gods have wiped out mankind in a flood, but in doing so they've cut off their supply of sacrifices.
So when Utnapishtim who's been tipped off by one of the gods and made a boat makes a burnt offering on finding dry land, as the text says they descend<like flies
5,000 years ago science wasn't seperate from religion. It was kind of do this, and see what result follows. Including the use of ritual and sacrifices.
A lot of them are probably redundant. There might have been some use in examinining a sheep's liver for signs and portents of disaster . If the soil is crap, then it would result in both a higher average of weird organ deformities, and disasters like crops failing. But it's a very indirect method compared to modern science.
But ritual is probably still good for things that require inspiration.