Hylistics generally deals with the analysis of sequences of events in the form of minimal state- or action-bearing units (hylemes). This makes the theory and methodology of hylistics suitable for the analysis of rituals.
1.1 Ritual: Introduction and definition
In order to work scientifically with the phenomenon of rituals, it is necessary to define the basic term “ritual” (and related terms such as “rite”). Statements about the function of rituals must not be confused with statements about the nature of rituals (definition). The essence of rituals is made up of their basic components, namely actions; in the case of religious rituals, these can also be referred to as “rites” (see below).
From today’s perspective, rituals in the broadest sense can be defined by the following general scientific (etic) definition:
A ritual is a fixed, repeatable sequence of actions.
(A. Zgoll 2025, 193)
Based on this general definition, religious rituals can be defined as follows (general etic definition):
A religious ritual is a fixed, repeatable sequence of actions used by people in a situation of interaction with numinous powers.
(A. Zgoll 2025, 193)
The ‘sequence of actions’ mentioned in the definition of ritual can be further differentiated: these actions are, on the one hand, verbal and, on the other hand, non-verbal, i.e. what is to be said in the context of the ritual and what is to be done (in the narrower sense of the word) physically. Even in ancient Greece and in ancient Sumer, specific terms were used for these two types of actions: Greek legomena, Sumerian ka enima for what was to be said, and Greek dromena, Sumerian ĝarza for what was to be done. It therefore makes sense to distinguish between ritual words and ritual deeds. The term ritual acts can serve as a generic term for all actions performed within a ritual, whether verbal or non-verbal (A. Zgoll 2025, 45-51 and 201).
According to the definition presented above, a rite corresponds to a ritual act (such as washing one’s hands or saying a prayer). ‘Ritual’ and ‘rite’ cannot be absolutely distinguished from one another; rather, they are terms that only gain meaning in relation to each other, i.e. they are relative and relational terms. Ritual is always the umbrella term for rites; but how small or large a scale one wishes to consider rites and rituals must be determined in each individual case on the basis of the specific question and objective of the investigation (A. Zgoll 2025, 202-204).
The combination of several interrelated rituals or ritual conglomerates can be found on special occasions, some of which are now referred to as ‘festivals’. The ritual conglomerate for such a festival may itself follow a higher-level structure, which proves to be a superordinate, structuring ritual in which the respective smaller rituals are classified. One can speak here of a kind of ‘umbrella ritual’ (A. Zgoll 2025, 205f.).
Rituals require – in addition to their spatial and temporal anchoring, their framework conditions – four constituents: objects, actions, persons and words. These are objects imbued with power, actions with a powerful effect, powerful persons who perform the ritual acts, and the power-laden words used in the ritual. Insofar as each of the four constituents plays an important role in the ritual, each one can be used to summarise an entire ritual (as pars pro toto), even if de facto all constituents together are necessary for a ritual (A. Zgoll 2025, 226-255).
Reference: A. Zgoll 2025, 191-207.
1.2 Categories of ritual functions
General basic function of rituals: interaction
Is there a basic function common to all rituals? From a scientific point of view, the answer to this question is clearly yes when it comes to religious rituals. Religious rituals aim to interact with deities and, depending on the culture, also with other ‘numinous powers’ that are imagined to be superhumanly powerful, such as guardian spirits, demons, ancestors, spirits of the dead or angels. They have a fixed form that is passed on because it has proven itself.
Other functions
In addition to this basic function, there are other general functions for which the following categorisation has proven useful:
A. Rituals pursue specific goals, as is often explicitly stated in written sources. These explicit, primary ritual goals are the explicit functions, main functions or macro functions of rituals. Such explicit functions include, for example, the appointment of a priestess, victory in war, or the expulsion of demons to cure an illness; the possible individual goals are as diverse as life itself.
B. Components of rituals, individual actions such as cleansing, sacrifice and prayer each have their own functions. These are subordinate to the goals of the overall ritual, the macro-functions, and are intended to support them; they are therefore referred to as micro-functions. Cleansing rites for ritual experts are important, for example, within a ritual for expelling disease demons. In order to achieve the macro-function, namely that the ritual expert can drive away the demons of disease, achieving the purity of the ritual expert is a necessary, subordinate micro-function. The assignment of functions is perspective-oriented, i.e. relative: If one analyses only the purification rites in isolation, their function of purifying the ritual expert can be described as a macro-function.
C. Implicit effects of rituals can be described as implicit functions, secondary functions or metafunctions. Such implicit effects of rituals consist, for example, in the fact that they can contribute to the experience of order and security or to the finding of identity among the people who perform them.
Reference: A. Zgoll 2025, 208-216.
1.3 Categories of rituals
The words and actions that are combined to form a ritual are determined by the purpose that the ritual serves, i.e. its ritual function (see above). It therefore makes sense to categorise rituals on the basis of their respective functions. In general, all rituals serve the basic function of enabling interaction with deities. For the development of systematic categories of rituals, classification based on specific macro-functions has proven to be useful. In an iterative process, which was pursued in an iterative feedback loop between inductive evaluation of concrete rituals and deductive search for superordinate, systematically distinguishable classes, three superordinate categories have been developed (A. Zgoll 2025, 220-225):
Category 1: Rituals aimed at serving numinous powers = ministrative rituals
Category 2: Rituals aimed at gaining knowledge = informative rituals
Category 3: Rituals aimed at changing a status or a situation = transformative rituals
Reference:
Zgoll, A., 2025, Rituale. Schlüssel zur Welt hinter der Keilschrift, Göttinger Beiträge zum Alten Orient 6, Göttingen.