the first thing i had to do was disregard a sheaf of my notes. there is no point in making a difference between burnt offerings & offerings of flesh. yeah, you can tie flesh offerings to augury, & i'm going to-- maybe that is where the maiden/madonna/crone trifecta will come in?-- but really, the practical butchering of animals & division thereof is too good to split. so i think the basic historical principal for meat sacrifice, on a pragmatic level, is the redistribution of animal protien. when agricultural revolution enters the picture, sacrifice becomes a fixture of intergenerational continuinity-- male continuity. the distribution defines the community. so this is going to be the boy's club. & it will be organically evolved into allowing incense to count, i'll probably do a bit of mythical trickery-- bones & fat burnt for the spirits (smoke geni) & meat for the people. left side of meat for the priest, right side for the people? or vice versa? there are questions that still need addressed, but the core is forming.
the new thing i'm adding in, thanks to rag & bone, are relics. the veneration of relics is going to be part of the history & practice of the church. on a conquest level, i think gemma auctoritas (the mythohistorical founder) had a program extending "empire" centered around the physical church. the wat, as it used to be-- the repository of local ancestor heroes. anyhow, chronologically prior to the ghoul migration into this part of the world, which is important. see, relics are fundamentally bits of dead people. there will be second degree relics (clothes worn by the figure, &c) & third degree (oil from a flask with a holy prepuce in it), but again, those are outgrowth topics. so women are viewed (historically) as unclean, as are the bodies of the dead, right? so it is only natural that the two meet. bodies are venerated, since the church is materialist, but still tabboo. so women are in charge of reliquary issues.
then of course the crux of the church is bloodletting. i'm going to make this mixed, boys & girls, because why muddy the issue? bloodletting-- of the self, of the scapegoat, for health issues. rank is going to play in here; the pontifex is the only person allowed to commit human sacrifice, & this human sacrifice is specifically a bloodletting one-- maybe there was a heretic pontiff in history that cannibalized, but i'm sure he's a nero or caligula horror to historians. bloodletting is exclusionary. only the church officials can bloodlet. it serves to delinate between ruler & ruled. oh, & the human sacrifice is of a holy, willing participant. i thought back & forth, but i realized that the "murder as honor" trope is better dramaticaly than a more pragmatic approach, though the authority over life-&-death angle is appealing. maybe i should re-examine & have burnt offering for prisoners, bloodletting for heroes?