The real history of Yerevan, rolled up in asphalt

Today is another anniversary of the transfer of the Azerbaijani city of Irevan to Armenia. It happened on May 29, 1918. The decision made by the ADR government was politically incorrect, but the leadership of the young republic, proclaimed a day earlier, had few options to resist the powers. If there were any such options.

External actors hastily glued Armenia together from the territories torn off from Azerbaijan and Georgia. For the first time in this region, a state was created for Armenians, and this entity needed a city for the capital. Although after several waves of genocide and deportation, Azerbaijanis remained in the minority in the territory of modern Armenia, nevertheless, Irevan was still a city with an Azerbaijani majority and was part of Azerbaijan. The Entente countries threatened the ADR not to recognize the republic if it did not share territories with the Armenians. And the day after the establishment of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic, Irevan was ceded to the Armenian side.

An interesting nuance was discovered in the documents of that period by Azerbaijani lawyer and diplomat, Professor Namik Aliyev. From a legal point of view, Irevan still belongs to Azerbaijan. According to him, the decision made by the Armenian National Council on May 28, 1918, to establish "an independent Republic of Armenia on the territory of Russian Armenia as part of the territories of the former Erivan province and Kars region of the Russian Empire" makes the transfer of Irevan to the Armenian capital a legally illegitimate act. This decision was made before the Azerbaijani National Council announced its verdict on the transfer of the capital of the Irevan Khanate to the Armenians on May 29.

But that's not all. Namik Aliyev stressed that the very decision of the Azerbaijani National Council (Protocol No. 3 of May 29, 1918) is a priori invalid. "Firstly, it was adopted under strong pressure from Western countries, in the presence of Armenian bandit groups in these territories, who staged total terror against the non-Armenian population there. And secondly, the document itself shows that the vote on the transfer of Irevan to the Armenians was either falsified or adopted with violations. Just look at the numbers. The meeting was attended by only 18 members of the Council out of 28, which is less than 65 percent, i.e. less than two thirds, mandatory for making fateful decisions. Of the 18, 16 members of the Council vote in favor, which is even less. And finally, the most important thing: with 18 people present, according to the Minutes, 20 Council members took part in the voting. Interesting arithmetic, isn't it?" the international lawyer remarked.

All this, Professor Aliyev believes, makes this document legally null and void, and the Republic of Azerbaijan has every reason to recognize the seizure and subsequent possession by the Armenian Republic of the capital of the Irevan Khanate, the city of Irevan, as illegal.

Of course, Baku will not take such steps, and the concept of Western Azerbaijan does not envisage the return of exiled Azerbaijanis to present-day Yerevan. This concept refers to the return of refugees to Western Zangezur, and the legal illegality of owning Irevan may not bother the Armenian side. But neighbors should not forget whose lands they live on.

Let's take at least the center of Yerevan. In Armenia, they always find themselves at a dead end when faced with the question of why there is no evidence of history in this city "older than Rome." There are no ancient monuments, there are only churches and residential buildings built not so long ago, which are at most 150 years old, no more. It is difficult for the neighbors to answer this question, and they have never thought about it.

The historical, Azerbaijani Irevan was literally rolled into asphalt according to the master plan developed in 1924 by architect Tamanyan. His "sunny city" was created on the ruins of the true Yerevan, which remained under squares, fountains, administrative buildings and avenues. But the vandals were apparently in a hurry and carried out the falsification poorly, which is why in recent years the asphalt has begun to sag in places, and here and there remnants of ancient buildings have appeared from the ground. I remember that in 2003, during the renovation work on Republic Square, workers came across the remains of medieval buildings. Archaeologists happily ran in here, but they were only able to dig for 12 days until the authorities realized what was going on. The work was immediately curtailed. The excavation site was filled with concrete and covered with asphalt. To remedy the situation, archaeologists said they had discovered the remains of a 17th-century city "replicating the architecture of the ancient Armenian state of Urartu." This, of course, was complete nonsense. The only thing that came close to reality was the dating, because the real Yerevan is only 500 years old.

Pashinyan behaved differently in a similar situation. When the historical truth once again tried to break through the asphalt and concrete, in January 2020, the Prime Minister of Armenia announced the start of work on opening the historical layer located under Republic Square and turning it into a museum. "As a result, Republic Square will become a bigger attraction," the Armenian Prime Minister said enthusiastically, saying that he was discussing with experts the possibilities of restoring the old city.

Unlike the masses, who really don't know that they've been trampling on the real history of the capital all their lives, fraud experts got worried and began to convince the prime minister to leave this case. And this concern was quite justified, because under the streets and squares of Yerevan was the real old Irevan, the city of Azerbaijani Muslim Turks. Pashinyan's grandiose plans did not materialize because they explained their danger to him, and most importantly, because Armenia soon had no time for excavations.

Pashinyan's predecessors made attempts to create an artificial "historical center." These discussions have especially intensified on the eve of the far-fetched "2800th anniversary" of Yerevan. The city is almost three thousand years old, but there is no evidence of this. It's a scandal. Due to the lobbying of Armenian interests in foreign scientific centers, the far-fetched dating was accepted without evidence. Erebuni, located far from Yerevan and declared its historical predecessor, has become a grandiose Armenian fake. The ancient ruins were not only declared "historical Yerevan", but also brazenly completed (!!!). And what should be emphasized is that foreign scientific centers have always known about all this and turned a blind eye to it. And this is an even more disgusting fact than even the falsification by the Armenian side of the ancient Urartian settlement, which has nothing to do with Armenia and the Armenians.

Pashinyan's predecessors failed to implement their plans. Firstly, this madness required huge investments, and secondly, no amount of money could help Armenia prove its alleged antiquity. Therefore, the project was quietly forgotten. Is it worth the money if Armenian fakes have already been accepted in world historiography?

The Azerbaijani city of Irevan has been the capital of Armenia for 107 years. It is very sad that it has been preserved only in photographs...