Louis A. Boettiger’s study, published in 1920 as part of the University of Minnesota’s Research Publications in the Social Sciences, approaches Armenian folklore not as a collection of quaint tales but as a living social force. The preface, written by Arthur J. Todd, frames the work as both a practical tool for American understanding of Armenian immigrants and a theoretical contribution to sociology—specifically, the study of how a “refractory culture” maintains its identity through “common traditions, common beliefs.” Boettiger, described as having an “intimate personal relationship to Armenian life,” organizes his material into two parts: legends and festivals, with the latter further divided into pagan, church-created, and church-adapted ceremonies.

From Pagan Rite to Christian Feast

The excerpts reveal a clear pattern of religious appropriation. Boettiger identifies festivals such as Vartavar, meaning “flaming of the rose,” originally celebrated in honor of the goddess Anahit, and shows how the church adopted them. He groups festivals into three categories: those “taken over bodily from the past,” new church-created ones, and ceremonies of common life with which the church identified itself. The midsummer festival of Vartavar, the spring festival, and Fortune-Telling Day all have pagan origins but were repurposed. This framework suggests that Boettiger is less interested in the original pagan meanings than in the mechanisms of cultural continuity and change.

The Cathedral and the Relic

Boettiger devotes considerable attention to Etchmiadzin, the seat of the Armenian Katholikos. He describes its layout: a central cathedral surrounded by monks’ cells, a refectory, library, seminary, and the Katholikos’s residence, all enclosed by a wall forming a rectangle about 1,000 by 700 feet. Outside lie the chapels of St. Gaiane and St. Rhipsime, commemorating martyrdom sites. The most striking detail is the “holy ‘atch’”—the right arm of St. Gregory, kept in a silver case. Boettiger notes that this relic was “the cause of many peregrinations,” seized and restolen by patriarchs to justify their claims. Such concrete, almost anthropological observation grounds the study in material culture.

A Sociological Lens on Folklore

The preface explicitly states the study’s dual purpose: practical and theoretical. Practically, it aims to provide Americans with “authentic studies of Armenia” at a time when the United States considered acting as mandatory for the country. Theoretically, it offers a case study of a “refractory culture” that resists amalgamation. Boettiger’s method is to treat legends and festivals as evidence of “mental community”—shared beliefs that define a nation more than mountains or blood. This sociological framing distinguishes the work from a mere anthology of folklore. Readers should expect analysis of how traditions persist and adapt, rather than a simple retelling of myths.

Boettiger’s study is best approached as a document of its time—a scholarly attempt to interpret Armenian culture for an American audience in the aftermath of World War I. The excerpts show a methodical, descriptive style that prioritizes institutional and ritual detail over narrative. Readers interested in the legends themselves may need to supplement this work with primary sources, as Boettiger’s focus is on their social function rather than their literary form.