In the introduction of "Hymns of Rig Veda" Griffith says that he had mostly followed Sayanacharya.
My translation, which follows the text of Max Müller's splendid
six-volume edition, is partly based on the work of the great scholiast
Sayana who was Prime Minister at the court of the King of Vijaynagar -
in what is now the Madras District of Bellary - in the fourteenth
century of our era. Sayana's Commentary has been consulted and
carefully considered for the general sense of every verse and for the
meaning of every word, and his interpretation has been followed
whenever it seemed rational, and consistent with the context, and with
other passages in which the same word or words occur."
Therefore, his interpretation of the Vedas is not different from Sayana's and which is "ritualistic" as this answer states.
And the Wiki page of Sayana Acharaya states that Max Muller also did the same.
Sayana was a Sanskrit-language writer and commentator. His major
work is his Vedartha Prakasha (literally, "the meaning of the Vedas
made manifest"), or commentary on the Vedas. His commentary on the
Rigveda was translated from Sanskrit to English by Max Müller,
1823-1900. His works were also used as a basis by Griffith, Muir,
Wilson and other European indologists. His continues to be one of
the six commentaries on the Vedas that modern day Vedic scholars read