vrx 200 trek

Trek VRX 200 2000 Technical specs and features

General specs of trek vrx 200 bicycle, wheels and breaking system, frame and body specifications, gearing specs, trek vrx 200 fork system data, other specs of trek vrx 200, trek vrx 200 picture, vrx 200 bike comparison.

Trek VRX 200 VS Giant ATX TEAM

Trek VRX 200 VS Scott Voltage FR20

Trek VRX 200 VS Giant Reign 1

Trek VRX 200 VS Haro Extreme MX3

Trek VRX 200 bike review

Trek produced the VRX 200 bike in 2000 and can be classified as a Mountain bike bicycle, this exact model costs in american market arround $1,199.99. VRX 200 bike is available in many sizes such as Large , medium and small . Trek Mountain bike VRX 200 can be found in one single color which is Trek Red. This bike is equiped with Front: 26 x 2.125" Bontrager Jones AC tires and DT stainless steel spoke wheel while the rims are manufactured by Front: Rolf Satellite, Rear: Rolf Satellite Assymetric, 24-hole/28-hole. Trek equiped this exact model with Aluminum linear-pull brakes, alloy levers braking system and Rolf Satellite hubs. To guarantee the comfiest ride Trek used Alpha FS aluminum material for the frame. ICON Stronghold high strength material is used on the handlebar of this VRX 200 to ensure the perfect handling while the stems are made of Alloy. For the smoothest biking experience ICON Obsidian, 22/32/44 teeth is used on this bicycle linked to 1/2 x 3/32" chain that is easily replaceable as stated by Trek , the whole system is connected to a high reliability Shimano Deore LX RapidFire SL gear shift levers.

• Get The best price of Trek VRX 200
• Find Trek VRX 200 parts and accessories

Trek VRX 200 competitors

The 2000 Trek VRX 200 is a full-suspension mountain bike with an aluminum Alpha FS / T6 / Cane Creek AD-5 frame. The frame has a Trek  Red finish.

It was released in 2000 and costs $1,199 brand new. Due to the frame materials and other factors, we estimate that this bike weighs around 35 pounds.

Components -->

The VRX 200 2000 comes with Mountain Mix components, including an aluminum, carbon, Ahead ICON stem, a threadless Aheadset headset and Shimano RapidFire SL shifters.

The Rock Shox, Marzocchi Bomber Z-3 Flylight and Answer Manitou fork has a true suspension.

The VRX 200 2000 has 9,8 speeds and has a Shimano derailleur.

It comes with Bontrager Jones tires ( x in front and x rear.) and disc, Rolf Bontrager rims.

When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

• Forum Listing
• Marketplace
• Advanced Search
• Vintage, Retro, Classic

Vintage TREK VRX 200 value?

• Add to quote

Someone is going to snatch it up just for the Mag 21 or 20.  

That is quite literally the worst mountain bike Trek ever made.  

Been looking for one of those sh*tshows to add to the collection, got a link to the Eject-O-Bike?  

Log into Facebook

BSO with Trek decals?  

That’s a real Trek bike. Considered buying one in the late 90s iirc. Not sure how it rides though. I think it was just after the Y bikes?  

Linkage driven single pivot?  

The VRX wasn't a good bike even in it's day. Hard pass for me.  

Thank you very much!  

Now THAT is a collectable bicycle! Reasonable price considering its good condition, too. =sParty  

• ?            
• 15.5M posts
• 516.1K members

Top Contributors this Month

• Pinkbike.com
• Register New User
• First Looks
• Friday Fails
• Community Blogs
• Fantasy League DH
• Places Directory
• XC / Cross Country Bikes

Trek VRX 200

Cool Features

• Скидки дня
• Справка и помощь
• Адрес доставки Идет загрузка... Ошибка: повторите попытку ОК
• Продажи
• Список отслеживания Развернуть список отслеживаемых товаров Идет загрузка... Войдите в систему , чтобы просмотреть свои сведения о пользователе
• Краткий обзор
• Недавно просмотренные
• Ставки/предложения
• Список отслеживания
• История покупок
• Купить опять
• Объявления о товарах
• Сохраненные запросы поиска
• Сохраненные продавцы
• Сообщения
• Уведомление
• Развернуть корзину Идет загрузка... Произошла ошибка. Чтобы узнать подробнее, посмотрите корзину.

Oops! Looks like we're having trouble connecting to our server.

Refresh your browser window to try again.

Trek Launches CarBack Radar Rear Bike Light with 2 KM Daytime Visibility

If you never leave home without a radar equipped taillight, trek has a new option for you..

Heading out the door? Read this article on the new Outside+ app available now on iOS devices for members! >","name":"in-content-cta","type":"link"}}'>Download the app .

Welcome to Velo’s Sea Otter Classic coverage, where we share our favorite things we’ve seen at the 2024 show. Bikes, components, everything racing, and more: if we think it’s cool, you’ll see it. See the rest of our coverage here .

Trek CarBack Radar Rear Bike Light

Trek is bringing to market the new Trek CarBack Radar Rear Bike Light and potentially reclaiming the rear light throne. This news doesn’t start today though. Instead, it started way back in 2018 when Bontrager came out with an absolutely groundbreaking light called the Flare RT. It was a pairing with the Ion 200 RT — both lights are tiny with the rear only hitting 40 grams on a scale. The trick was that despite the tiny size, there was still a sizable 12-hour battery, and even more than the battery and size, there was an innovative lens and flash pattern.

The details in the press release are long gone but the idea was that everyone should be riding with rear lights even in the day. The lens used a fresnel design that made it way brighter than it had any right to be and instead of a basic on and off flash the Flare RT used an irregular pattern. Trek did a sizable amount of research at the time showing how effective it was even in bright light and the brand was right. I personally experienced my wife driving past me through the high-desert of eastern Oregon in the midday sun. She told me at the time how much better it made her feel to know that she could see that tiny light well before she could make me out.

Bontrager had a hit light, but then Garmin came out with the RTL515. It had a similar Fresnel lens and a similar irregular flash but it added Varia radar. Not only could cars see you in midday sun but now you could see them without looking or listening. You could see how fast they were coming and how many were there without ever looking up. The RTL515 doomed the Bontrager light to second fiddle but after a 2020 release, Garmin left it to flounder.

Years later the RTL515 is still a great light, but it’s Trek, having now started to phase out the Bontrager name, who is set to sweep the Garmin product into irrelevance. The Trek CarBack Radar Rear Bike Light takes the Flare RT and builds it into a new shell with radar tech included also.

The end result is a design that combines all the best features of both the Garmin Varia and the Flare RT plus adds a few new tricks. As with the Flare RT, there’s a big emphasis on staying visible with a quoted 2km day-time visibility using the same lens and flash pattern. There’s also an IPX7 waterproof rating and USB-C charging.

Availability

The new light is available today via Trek.com and the only questions I’m left with are around the battery. Trek tells me there’s a 2,000 mAh battery on board which is a 600 mAh increase from the Garmin. There’s also a battery gauge on the side so you always know what’s left in the tank. Unfortunately the brand is also quoting a rather low 7-hours of daytime flash. The upside is that I’m also told that’s a conservative number and it depends heavily on the numbers of cars detected. I know as soon as I have the chance I’ll be looking to see what the upper limits really are.

Popular on Velo

What’s it like to be an American cyclist living in France? Watch to get professional road cyclist Joe Dombrowski’s view.

Related content from the Outside Network

One way south, mountain bikers react to their first taste of non-alcoholic craft beer, video review: bmc urs 01 two gravel bike, kiel reijnen vuelta video diary: the painful decision to abandon.

• ALL MOUNTAIN
• ACCESSORIES
• ALL (130 Forums)
• WHEELS & TIRES

Trek 1999 VRX 200 Full Suspension Bike

1999 Trek VRX 200, mountain bike, front & rear suspension, Mountain Mix components, Rock Shox Jett XC, 3.0" travel fork

• USER REVIEWS

Frame,overall feel. Huge riding compartment. If your just a weekend warrior or are sick of being abused by a alu hardtail buy this bike.

Could be better components, but it is the low end model.Easily upgraded. No complaints about water bottles, Trek but water cage on seatpost.

For the price and my aching hartail a** this bike just floats and makes me grin. I've been riding for 30 years and this baby pampers my butt. I'm no racer so the weight aint a problem. I have a med frame and for my 5'11" 210 lb frame it was huge and very comfy.

Similar Products Used:

Speci FSR...not near a smooth ride. Gt i-drive...really heavy.

excellent climber and plush rear suspension

Where to place a bottle ?

I bought this bike mainly to get the frame because I have a perfect set of parts. After some changes (my wife got some brandnew parts on my old frame, a Scott Vertigo), the Bikes works very well. The climbing is OK, to go downhill is great. The quality of the frame is absolutely convincible. Some of the original Parts are poor, but for this money it is OK: The cranks are made of rubber and shifting makes no joy. The Bonntrager wheelset is good for this price, but I will change it to the ultimate Set: HUGI/DT/MAVIC 517. I would buy this Bike again.

Cannondale SV900 Scott Octane Scott LSD B1

The frame design is a classic piece of engineering magic and I like to think historical in some ways due to the amount of low budget bike maker who followed suit in early 2000. It's made from high grade aerospace materials and the craftsmanship is second to none. The design isn't flawless but I've never managed to bend it which underline the fact that this chunk of ali is bomb proof.

The lower end of the frame between the swinging arm and crank isn't wide enough to cope with forces of the rider. The section being quite slim allows the frame to bend and twist as the rides weigh is transferred from to saddle, which is slung way out there over the rear tire. Sounds bad, but it really isn't. I actually belive this contributes to the bike phenominal handling on down hill cornering, it almost guides you round the bends and the Cane Creek shock is just right to deal with this, due to its slow rebound characteristics. Forget the components, you're not spending your money on those when you bought a VRX. Trek's budget was obsorbed on the frame that's why it was discontinued after the accountant looked at the books.

I've looked at trading this baby in many many time but nothing I've ridden feels the same. I first realised what this frame was all about when I was riding up a old pack trail on the Penines in Derbyshire. Imaging an old cobbled street, inclined and too bumpy to ride on a hardtail. It was was actually like riding down a flat freely laid highway! I was amazed. It looks stunning, maybe a bit dated now but that doesn't mean newer designs are more efficient. No matter how you design a frame you can't eliminate bob completely without lock-out. This frame is as near as it gets, infact the bob effect is what helps it gluide up rough, slightly inclined trails. It looks like a down hill preditor and many people have tuned them for free ride. But this babe is bread from cross country long days out. It obsorbs the trail and never leaves you feeling fatigued even after the hardest days ride. On the down hills it always wants more, certainly more than I can give it. I always seem to run out of stamina and balls. A quick breather and I can't wait to get back on again. If you've got one don't sell it, upgrade to the best kit you can afford and keep riding it. It's the mountain bike equivelant to the chopper and will be a classic one. If your in the UK key your eyes open cos they're rare, in fact I've never seen anyone else with one its so unique.

Cannondale Jekyl, Specialise Rockhopper, various hardtails

Bike has a nice neutral feel, looks cool (especially in red)

I have had more problems with this bike than I can count. I have always been hard on my toys, but I cannot ride this thing without breaking stuff, and I'm only riding street, small parks, and trails, no big hits! I don't even crash much and I have destroyed my derailer, bent my frame, stripped out my crank (on the frame), toasted 2 other cranks, my forks no longer adjust (they did for about a month) and blown the cane creek shock. This is the first bike I spent any real amount of money on, and I can barley even afford to ride it. I don't know if I got a lemon or what but this thing is a piece of sh#@!!

Despite regular maintence and relatively low key riding terrain, this bike doesn't hold up to anything!!!

Killer RED frame, great value/price, decent travel (for my style)

Discontinued, creaky crank, cheap OEM (Icon) parts, Bontrager tires, seat(bought w/o one, told dealer to keep!), handgrips, brakes, calipers...

If you are looking for a great beginner/intermediate setup that you can gradually spend some money on, this is the ride. It is hard to find one for sale, but it is worth it to wait it out. I have had mine for 1 year now and have steadily done upgrades. Nothing major yet. I do intend to replace the front shock with a SID soon, just waiting for a good deal. Got the AVID SD7 brakes from pricepoint.com for 65$, for the SET! That is the best upgrade I have done yet. I like not sitting over the front wheel like the Rockhopper, and this affords more reach. I did not like the flat bar, I have longer legs so my seat sits higher and therefore I had to stoop over. The titec riser helps tremendously, and the paint matched! Overall, I wish this bike would return to their lineup in an upgraded fashion from Trek, and allow more people to experience this great ride....

Specialized Rockhopper FSR, Mongoose XR850

Trek quality, lifetime warranty, simple design, very strong frame, not too heavy, nice looks (I think !), good paint finish on main frame

none to worry about - seat slightly uncomfortable, decals on swing arm came off

I have owned this bike for over 5 years now and I am still as pleased with it as I was the day I bought it. The frame is very strong and takes everything. I have never stripped the bike down, and it has never had a major service - just keep it clean, oil it and thats it - it will keep on going. I want to get into some more heavy duty freeride (hence the set up), but this bike can still handle everything I can. I have never been worried about the bike failing. I was a bit annoyed when this frame was discontinued after such a short production run, but it has proved Trek wrong, and just makes this thing more rare ! I do not like the new rocker-type Session 7 design of Trek's new freeride bike and prefer this more simple design. If you get a chance to buy one - DO IT ! the frame is amazing (light and strong) and better components can be added if you wish. I have never had a real problem with bobbing of the suspension, just don't jump up and down on it as you climb hills - simple as that. Get the 1999 VRX, it has a coil shock and 3 suspension settings (rather than 2 on the VRX 2000 air shock model).

rode various other bikes but this is my first serious mountain bike

* Frame * Upgradable

Best bike on earth. You can upgrade till you have no money. Buy it and like it.

most XC bikes

all round awesome bike for DH or just cruising around on the streets, doin trick jumps

the bolts tend to rust and also low end components, but now i have upgraded, it is sweet.

awesome bike... my setup has made it a tad heavy, but still easy to climb up hills... awseome for doing DH with 5 of pluch travel

C'dale SV900

Very plush rear suspension. Nice paint job. Beefy FIL design. Comfortable ride.

Heavy, Slow acceleration and not agile. Suspensions have no dampening. Entry level front suspension.

This would be a good bike if you wanted to ride casually. It would not win competitive races because of it's weight. It is a heavy bike and will take its toll on long rides. I was impressed by its rear suspension as it work very well over rough ground. VRX 300 feels lighter and rides better because of dampening adjustments you can make front and rear but is $500 Canadian more. I purchased the Trek 8000 HardTail because it was the same price as the VRX 200 and is a muchlighter faster and responsive XC bike.

Specialized FSR, Trek VRX 300

Just got the bike this week end, so i haven't ridden it on the trails yet as there is a foot of snow here. Very good components for my ussage and the weight is not a factor as i don't plan to race the bike. I upgraded the forks off the bat to Judy 100 to match the rear end travel. Plan to buy a camel back as the 2 water bottle mounts are not very accessible when ridding. For what i have ridden it so far i give the bike a 4 chilly's

Get the latest mountain bike reviews, news, race results, and much more by signing up for the MTBR Newsletter

Hot Deals See All Hot Deals >>

• CLASSIFIEDS
• TERMS OF USE
• PRIVACY POLICY
• ADVERTISING

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2024 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.

• Crossword Tips

Clue: City S of Moscow

Referring crossword puzzle answers, likely related crossword puzzle clues.

• Russian city
• Pitcher Hershiser
• City on the Oka
• Sportscaster Hershiser
• Hurler Hershiser
• City south of Moscow
• Turgenev's birthplace
• Baseball's Hershiser
• Soviet city

Recent usage in crossword puzzles:

• New York Times - Sept. 26, 1993
• New York Times - May 20, 1985

The spiraling 246m high Evolution Tower is located on plots 2-3 of Moscow-City high-rise business district on Presnenskaya Embankment of Moscow river. New multi-function center occupies the territory of 2.5ha in area, 2ha of which is a landscaped terraced civic plaza, the integral part of the new city piazza, the central open public space of Moscow-City business downtown.

ivic plaza includes 10m high ceremonial stairs (leading from embankment and pedestrian Bagration Bridge to the higher terraced levels) as well as landscaped areas with green lawns, trees, water features, travellators and feature lightboxes.

Evolution Tower

Location: Moscow, Russia

Typology: High-Rise, Office, Mixed-Use

Years: Construction 2011-2014

Status: Built

Height: 246m

Design team: GORPROJECT  (2011-2015), 

RMJM Scotland Ltd 

(original concept 2005-2007)

Under the piazza levels the 2-storey retail mall connects the Evolution Tower with metro station and pedestrian bridge over Moscow river, thus integrating the new development into the large Moscow-City district, the Europe's newest and most ambitious high-rise cluster (7 of 10 highest European skyscrapers ae located here), housing over 4 million square meters of office and retail areas with associated transport and engineering infrastructure.   

The Evolution Gallery mall houses food court and 6,000m2 family entertainment and educational center for various children activities (the first center of that kind in Moscow). 

The 82,000m2 office tower has 52 levels rotated 3 degrees each floor with overall twist reaching 156 degrees clockwise. With world’s largest innovative cold-bent glazing the tower façade provides seamless floating reflection that rotates the panoramas of Moscow skyline vertically, where the reflected clouds moving up enhance the dynamic visual impact of the twisted tower, an unprecedented optical effect in the world architecture.  The Crown with supporting steel structure made of two twisted arches provides the helipad at the very top as well as the open observation roof decks at Levels 51-52 featuring the best panoramas of Moscow riverside with views towards the historical center. 

From the very beginning the developer and architects have set an ambitious task to create a recognizable and symbolic tower, the new icon of contemporary Moscow.  The sculptural DNA-shaped twisting tower symbolizes the evolution spiral with the white façade ribbon wrapping over the roof in a form of 90-degree twisted infinity symbol, which speaks of philosophical concept of evolution and celebrates the development of human civilization. From spiraling onion domes of St. Basil to the iconic Tatlin Tower concept the Russian architecture was obsessed with idea of spiral. The simple and innovative design was based on principles of twisting square-shaped floor plates with vertical structural RC frame supported by a central core and 8 columns with continuous beams and 4 spiraling columns at the corners. 

The proposed structural scheme with cantilevered continuous RC beams and cantilevered floor slabs  picking up the overhangs from the twisted floor plates appeared to be simple, efficient and economical. The complex sculptural tower façade envelope was built using the innovative cold-bent glazing with flat double glazed units cold-formed in 3D within the aluminum frame under its own weight to avoid stepping in geometry. This approach appeared to be both more energy-efficient and more cost-efficient solution in comparison to the stepped curtain wall units previously applied in some twisted unitized facades. 

The multifunctional architectural glass by Guardian significantly reduces the solar gain whilst providing the double glazed unit thermal performance equal to standard triple glazed unit normally used in Moscow to withstand harsh winter conditions. The use of innovative TWIN elevators by ThyssenKrupp saved 2 shafts within the core (10 TWINs instead of 12 double-deckers in the original concept) and contributed to the overall project sustainability with lesser power consumption per passenger. Other sustainable design features include green roofs over the retail mall and integrated coil floor heating under landscaped civic piazza levels using the return water in winter to melt the snow and ice for the safety of pedestrians. The reinforced concrete formwork by PERI, including self-climbing ACS formwork specially designed for the twisting corner columns, allowed to achieve the impressive speed of RC frame construction of 6 days per floor due to perfect site logistics by Renaissance Construction as main contractor. 

All innovative design solutions and optimizations secured the delivery of this fairly unique skyscraper within the project plan and almost within the budget of the standard ‘benchmark’ high-rise building. This turned out to be a major achievement of the design and construction teams. 

The organic twisting silhouette dominates on its background of extruded glass towers greatly contributing into the overall composition of the high-rise Moscow-City cluster. The development delivered a significant open public space on the landscaped roof of the retail mall, thus providing the perfect mix of business uses with public and social activities of the civic plaza and the mall with its food court and core family entertainment function. The synergy of that mix with large underground car-park complemented by the direct link to the metro station and pedestrian bridge as means of main public transportation secured the successful project completion with the recent entire tower acquisition. Bold shape and timeless aesthetics as added values brought by its unique architecture materialized in a commercial success of this project with the tower being fully acquired for corporate headquarters even in the context of oversupply in the Moscow office market. The outstanding quality of architecture and its fine detailing, state of the art building services and communications of Class A office Tower together with the highest level of transport accessibility  (direct access to metro station from the lobby, large car-parking, proximity to boat pier and helipads) make this property very attractive for tenants and visitors. The beautiful riverside panoramas from offices are complemented by green roof and water features of the large 2ha terraced civic piazza as the main recreational outdoor space with direct link from the office tower lobby. 

The highest quality of façade cladding, glazing, vertical transportation and MEP equipment from leading European and international suppliers provided the truly Class-A office environment with the luxury of minimalist spirit in the architecture of the new landmark on the Moscow skyline. Even before its completion the sculptural spiral of Evolution Tower, more often appearing in commercials, posters and magazines, became a new icon for modern Moscow as the symbol of its business ambitions and fast development. The Evolution Tower also became the monument to the courage of its developer (Snegiri Group) and investors, who built the great deal of trust with architects, engineers and contractors by investing their efforts and funds in a challenging adventure of designing and building the unique and innovative skyscraper for the capital of Russia. 

Evolution Reflections

Philipp nikandrov.

• About Our Authors
• SRAS: Study Abroad or Online
• GeoHistory: Geopolitics, History, News
• PopKult: Popular Culture
• Museum Studies: Museum Science, High Culture, City Planning
• Students Abroad: Travel Guides

Popular articles

View of the Kremlin and surrounding area from 1825. From The Album of Ancient Views of the Moscow Kremlin , by Ivan Zabelin. Available online from the Yeltsin Library .

The Kremlin: Moscow’s Historical Heart Through the Ages

Published: December 3, 2021

The Moscow Kremlin has long been the main symbol of Moscow and Russia – and for good reason. It was with the Kremlin that city of Moscow officially began and from which it grew. The Prince of Moscow, ruling from the Kremlin and drawing on the growing power of his city, united and conquered the cities and lands around him to create Russia.

While the Kremlin can be seen as something of a constant in Russian history, the Kremlin itself has seen major changes within its walls and to its own status. It has lost and gained buildings. It has changed from the seat of government to an ancillary structure, back to the governmental seat, and finally to a museum complex.

The resource below unites the work of multiple SRAS students writing on Home and Abroad , Challenge Grants , and Online Research Internships to bring you an overarching view of this iconic complex.

The Kremlin Walls

By Hudson Dobbs

The Kremlin was first established in 1156 by Prince Yuri Dolgorukiy. This post-dates the first mention of Moscow, which dates back to 1147, when Prince Dolgorukiy invited Prince Sviatoslav of Chernigov to Moscow to celebrate their alliance.

The actual site of this stronghold has likely been occupied since the second millennium BCE. It likely had fortifications built there as early as the 10th century, by the then-resident Vyatichi, a tribe of Slavic peoples.

Eventually, Prince Dolgorukiy ordered the construction of what would become the Kremlin walls. These first walls were tall and expansive and built out of wood. Although this structure was built for protection, it also served as a symbol for the power and strength of the new city of Moscow.

While the first walls did their job well, they were eventually burnt down by Tatar-Mongol forces and later upgraded to more fire-resistant oak in 1339. As the city grew, the Kremlin also further developed, and with it the popularity of building fortresses in town centers. Cities such as Smolensk, Kazan, Novgorod, and Pskov all constructed a Kremlin of their own. In fact, the word “kremlin” simply means “a fortress within a city.”

By the 13th century, the Kremlin housed the political and spiritual power of the state, with residences, workshops, churches, and state buildings all residing within its walls. In the 1360’s, Prince Dmitry Donskoy rebuilt the walls in limestone and a gleaming white Kremlin soon became the iconic image of Moscow. These walls were credited in helping the city defend itself from sieges by Grand Duke Algirdas of Lithuania in the late 1360’s.

The walls and towers that exist today are still another iteration, and were built on the order of Grand Prince Ivan III, also known as Ivan the Great, from 1485 to 1495. Ivan wanted to build something grander and more worthy of being his residence – something that would be comparable to Constantinople in terms of size and importance.

Wanting what would be specifically a “Third Rome,” Ivan invited Italian architects such as Aristotele Fioravanti and Pietro Antonio Solari. Their involvement is why the current fortress closely resembles castles of Northern Italy. Its red brick made the Kremlin unique for the time, as it was the first structure in Russia built from such material.

These brick walls have stood, with minor adjustments, since that time. One noticeable change came in the late 1600s, when Tsar Fyodor Alekseevich ordered the red brick to be whitewashed in limestone, returning it to gleaming white the city had been hitherto known for. Eventually, the whitewash stopped being maintained and was allowed to wear off, a process that was complete by the 1900s.

Grand Kremlin Palace Tour

By Jack Fisher

Formerly the Moscow residence of the Russian tsars, the Grand Kremlin Palace (not to be confused with the State Kremlin Palace) is a complex inside the Kremlin. It now hosts diplomatic meetings and official state ceremonies including presidential inaugurations. It is also designated as a residence of the President of the Russian Federation, but is rarely used for that purpose.

When SRAS gave me the opportunity to take an exclusive tour of this complex, which is an exclusive tour that is normally off-limits to the general public, I had to take it.

This particular tour is different from those that cover the more public areas inside the Kremlin and requires signing up early and submitting your documents for a security check.

I met the tour group on a Friday afternoon in Aleksandrovski Sad, which borders the Kremlin walls. From there, we made our way towards the Kremlin grounds entrance. There was a huge line to get into the grounds through a first security checkpoint, but we were able to skip straight to the front of it since we had registered for our tour ahead of time. Once we were through the gate, the crowd thinned out significantly.

As we walked through the Kremlin grounds, we saw other tour groups taking photos of the landscaping, palace, and other historical buildings. Unlike us, they didn’t have the permission of the Russian government to enter the actual palace. When we got to the palace, we walked through the front doors, crossed a second security checkpoint, met our guide, and started the tour.

Our tour guide inside the building was a woman that worked in preservation. She only spoke Russian, so everything was translated for us by an SRAS-hired guide to English. We began on the first floor of the newer section of the palace and saw several ornate living rooms and guest rooms, followed by the empress’s and emperor’s chambers. Unfortunately, we weren’t allowed to see the emperor’s office and bathroom as President Putin had decided to use them as his personal study for the remainder of his time in office.

After the first floor, we headed upstairs to the second. From the outside the palace appeared to have three floors, but in reality the second floor just had massive, vaulted ceilings and two levels of windows. From what I saw, the second floor seemed to be where the fun happened. The first major room we walked into was the Hall of the Order of St. George, built to house major military meetings and balls and today used as a large conference room. There were names of famous military officers and soldiers inscribed on the walls, and the hall looked like it could hold hundreds of guests. Then it was on to the Hall of the Order of St. Vladimir, which was way less cool. It did, however, have the largest chandelier in the palace, for what that’s worth.

Next, we moved into the oldest section of the palace. It was built in the late 1400s and the newer sections of the palace were built out to connect with it. Our guide told us that by the time of the last czars, the older section was used strictly for ceremonial purposes. The walls were covered with paintings of historical rulers and religious figures. It was definitely my favorite room as there seemed to be an aura of timelessness hanging about the place.

Then we went back through the Hall of the Order of St. Vladimir and through another hall to the older bedchamber of the czar and an older, smaller meeting room for the czar and his nobles. This section was markedly different as there was none of the opulence of the newer palace. It had a utilitarian feel due to its practical layout with comfortable but plain looking chairs, reasonably sized paintings, low ceilings and large traditional Russian stoves.

Finally, we visited the throne room. It was massive, just like the Hall of the Order of St. George, and had polished stone and gilding everywhere. Unfortunately, it was a reconstruction. Our guide let us know that the soviets had torn it apart when they came to power, creating what looked like a massive classroom to house the first meetings of the Soviet Congress. The Russian government had restored it completely within the past decade. She also let us know that the current heir to the Russian throne is Prince Harry of England, which is an interesting fact I’ve been surprising Brits with lately.

On our way out, we exited through a portrait hall. Most of the portraits were typical Enlightenment and Victorian era paintings with stuffy looking people. However, one painting caught my eye: the portrait of Knyaz Sbyatoclav. The man looked absolutely hardcore (and you can see him below in a photo I took).

In my opinion, it was definitely worth $75. While I wouldn’t go twice, the fact of the matter is that you get to see the inside of a beautiful building and stand in rooms that very powerful people meet in and have met in for hundreds of years – which is an opportunity that few regular people are given. Don’t think that it’s too expensive, because you’ll have the experience and memory with you for the rest of your life.

The Kremlin Without a Capital (1712-1918)

By Lee Sullivan

The Kremlin has always been a symbol of Russian power and authority. It is often used interchangeably with the Russian state in journalism and academic literature. This is not surprising considering the Kremlin is situated in the heart of Moscow and has typically housed Russian rulers and their offices – and continues to contain an official residence and office for Russian president Vladimir Putin. However, not all of Russia’s leaders have always called the Moscow fortress home. This article covers the nearly 200 years of Kremlin history when Moscow was not the capital.

Peter the Great moved Russia’s capital from Moscow to St. Petersburg in 1712. Despite the continued crowning of tsars in the Annunciation Cathedral and symbols of power in the Kremlin vaults, Moscow’s role in state life was minimal compared to that of the new capital. This changed when a new stage of construction began under Catherine the Great. Even though St. Petersburg was the new capital, she was crowned in Moscow following ancient tradition. A commission to replace the code of laws from Tsar Alexey Mikhailovich’s time was called in Moscow and its session was held in the Kremlin’s Faceted Palace. This was a sign that under Catherine the Great the state would be ruled from both St. Petersburg and Moscow. Additionally, the Senate was divided into departments under Catherine. Four were in St. Petersburg and two were in the newly commissioned Senate Building, which still stands in the Moscow Kremlin.

Catherine additionally planned a grand reconstruction of the Kremlin interior, one that would have seen most of its buildings demolished, save for the historic cluster of churches, and replaced with modern imperial architecture built with long, straight roads, much like St. Petersburg itself. Demolition was started, including to parts of the original Kremlin walls, when cracks began to appear in one of the cathedral walls due to the resulting disruption of the soil. Because of this, and because of the project’s already enormous cost, it was cancelled, and the original walls re-built.

In September of 1812, French troops occupied Moscow. Napoleon, who led them, planned to occupy the Kremlin as his residence. It is widely thought that in defense against the French, the Moscow mayor ordered fires be set across the city. They raged for days so and were so intense that Napoleon was forced to leave the Kremlin due to the smoke. Upon returning he declared an intention to remain in the Kremlin for winter and ordered additional fortification of the Kremlin walls. However, the French army was weakening due to battle loss and poor supply.

Napoleon ordered his troops to retreat and blow up the Kremlin in the process. Mines were laid but their effectiveness was reduced by rain and prompt Muscovite response. Still, considerable damage was done, including to the Vodozvodnaya Tower, which was completely destroyed.

The Kremlin quickly underwent restoration under Tsar Alexander I and Nicolas I. Despite the war’s considerable drain on state funding, Tsar Alexander I prioritized restoring many parts of the Kremlin including towers, walls, palaces, and cathedrals. He often traveled to Moscow to observe the restoration progress. Many of Russia’s best architects were included in the restoration efforts. Order was progressively restored to the Kremlin and new gardens, now called the Alexander Gardens, were laid out along its exterior. Buildings like the Senate were brought back to their original appearance.

Restoration was completed under Nicholas I, who gave special attention to the restoration of ancient Kremlin churches and other old buildings. He also commissioned the construction of new buildings like the Great Kremlin Palace, after having the old one demolished. The entire imperial family attended the palace blessing during an official ceremony in April 1849. It was constructed and designed with techniques that were ahead of their time – vaulted construction for walls and ceilings, inlaid stone floors, and iron rafters.

Shortly after the revolution, the Communists restored Moscow as the official capital in 1918 when Moscow was reinstated as Russia’s capital. Construction and restoration were completed by the mid-19 th century. During the Soviet years, the Kremlin housed Soviet leaders and saw the development and then dissolution of the Soviet state. Today the Kremlin stands in Russia’s capital as a unique architectural ensemble.

The Kremlin Under the Soviets

The new Bolshevik government made sweeping changes to the historic Kremlin complex to, as they saw it, better represent the character of the new socialist state.

During the revolution of November 1917, the Kremlin was ransacked, leaving it with broken glass, destroyed icons, and parts of the complex in disrepair. Restoration of the walls and towers began in 1918, but further restoration stalled for lack of funding and because the communists had not yet decided on a plan for their changes to their seat of government.

The first targets were churches and royal symbols. Nuns and monks who had long lived in the Kremlin were removed. Churches had valuables removed and transferred to the new Commissariat of Finances to fund state projects. Many royal treasures and even crown jewels were similarly transferred. The double-headed eagles on the top of the buildings were promptly removed.

Many buildings were repurposed. Initially, many were converted to housing for Communist functionaries as the revolution and war had depleted Moscow’s housing stock while driving immigration from the countryside to the city. At one point, over two thousand people lived inside the Kremlin. By 1939, however, Kremlin residents consisted of only about three dozen high ranking officials.

Other notable repurposings included turning the Palace of Facets into a canteen with its kitchen inside the Tsarina’s Golden Chamber. The Ivan the Great Bell Tower was turned into a workshop, the Small Nicholas Palace became a worker’s club, and a gym was placed in the Church of St. Catherine. In 1932, the Andrew and Alexander Halls within the palace were gutted to make room for a party congress.

Many of the buildings and statues within the complex were destroyed, often to make way for new construction; only 26 of the original 54 buildings survived the Soviet period. The Chudov Monastery and Ascension Convent were both destroyed to make way for a military academy and eventually the Kremlin Presidium was built on the ground to house the Supreme Soviet, the supreme legislative body of the USSR.

In 1929, the Maly Nikolaevsky Palace, a former royal residence, was replaced by a new administrative building.

In the 1920s, the Russian royals buried in the Archangel Cathedral on the Kremlin’s Cathedral Square were exhumed and autopsied. They and the items in their sarcophagi were turned over to the Kremlin museum. Some valuable artifacts were requisitioned to the state treasury.

In 1935, five stars of rubied glass replaced the double-headed eagles that once topped the Kremlin gate towers.

Throughout WWII, the Kremlin was disguised under mock construction and painted roofs. Despite this, several bombs still fell on the Kremlin grounds, but did not cause major damage.

In 1947, Stalin painted the Kremlin walls red in an unmistakable ode to socialism, a drastic change from the traditional white that the walls had carried for centuries.

In 1955, the Kremlin opened to the public as an open air museum. In that same year, a ban on living in the Kremlin was introduced, lessening any security risk opening it to the public might create.

The last wave of demolitions came in 1958-1961, when the Palace of Congresses, built to house the congresses of Communist Party and cultural events, replaced the Old Amoury and part of the Patriarch’s Palace.

In part due to the outcry from this massive renovation, greater care of the Kremlin grounds began. The official Kremlin museum system was established in 1966, and Elena Gagarin, daughter of Yuri Gagarin, was hired as museum director. Today, that system includes the large armoury, several churches, and items outside of the Kremlin, such as St. Basil’s Cathedral.

The changes made during the Soviet period have left the Kremlin with a striking architectural contrast between traditional, tsarist-era architecture with Soviet-style buildings and the iconic, ancient red walls and remaining cathedrals. Despite the destruction and changes that were carried out, the compound still offers an unforgettable look into Russian and Soviet history that is impossible to get from anywhere else.

The Kremlin Stars

Translated by Caroline Barrow

The following was originally posted to the the Russian 7 website . It has been translated here by SRAS Home and Abroad Translation Scholar Caroline Barrow. Additional edits and updates were applied in 2021.

On October 24, 1935, two long-standing symbols of the Russian monarchy—the two-headed eagles which stood on top of the Kremlin towers, were ordered to be brought down and replaced with five-pointed stars.

Why a five-pointed star became the symbol of the Soviet regime is unknown, but what is known is that Lev Trotsky supported this symbol. Greatly fascinated by the esoteric, he knew that stars and pentagrams have a strong energetic potential and are one of the strongest symbols. The swastika could have easily become the symbol of the new government, since it had a strong following in Russia at the beginning of the twentieth century. Swastikas were displayed on the currency of the temporary government led by Alexander Kerensky, and swastikas were painted on the walls of Empress Alexandra Fedrovna’s Ipatiev House before the royal family was executed there. This swastika trend was stopped almost solely by Trotsky and the Bolsheviks, who opted for the five-pointed star. The history of the twentieth century even showed that stars are stronger than swastikas… Stars shone over the Kremlin, in the place of two-headed eagle.

Erecting the thousand-kilogram stars on the Kremlin towers was not a simple thing to do. The problem was that the needed technology did not exist in 1935. The smallest of the Kremlin Towers, Borovitskaya, rose to 52 meters, and the tallest tower, Troitskaya, reached a height of 72 meters. Throughout the country, there were no tower cranes capable of reaching these heights. However, for Russian engineers, the word “no” did not exist, only the phrase “we must.” Engineers designed and built special cranes that could be installed on the upper deck for each tower. A metal base, called the console, was mounted at the base of each turret window, and on each console the engineers mounted a lifting crane. Thus, the process occurred in several stages: first the two-headed eagles were dismantled, and second, the stars erected.

Each star weighs about one ton. Given the height at which the stars would be placed and the fact that each star has a surface area of 6.3 square meters (potentially excellent for catching the wind), there was a danger that the stars might be blown away along with the top of the towers. So, it was decided to stress test the towers and, it turns out, with good reason: the upper part of each tower and its console was completely destroyed in the process. So, builders reinforced the masonry at the upper levels of the towers, and for the Spasskaya, Troitskaya, and Borovitskaya Tower, metal bracing was added to the base of the tower. The console on Nikolskaya Tower was so damaged that it had to be completely rebuilt.

All the stars were not made identical; four stars differ from one another in their artistic forms. On the Spasskaya Tower star, rays go out from the center. However, on Troitskaya Tower’s star, the rays look like spikes. The star on Borovitskaya Tower is made up of two contours, one inscribed in the other, and, finally, the rays on Nikolskaya Tower’s star have no pattern. In terms of length, the Spasskaya and Nikolskaya Towers were similar, with the distance between the ends of the rays being about 4.5 meters. On Troitskaya and Borovitskaya Towers, the star rays were shorter, and the distance between the ends of the rays was less, measuring 4 and 3.4 meters, respectively.

A star is good, but a spinning star is twice as nice. Moscow is large, its people many, and all must see the Kremlin stars. For the base of each star, special bearings were produced by the First Bearing Plant. These special bearings allow the stars to rotate with the wind even despite their significant weight. Consequently, it is possible to know the direction of the wind given the position of the stars.

Installation of the Kremlin Stars was a true celebration for Muscovites. The stars were not carried under the cover of night to Red Square. The day before the stars were placed on the towers they were put on display in Gorky Park. District and City Secretaries of the Communist Party came together with the ordinary mortals below to see the stars. The stars were lit from the outside to make the Ural stones shine and the rays sparkle. The eagles, taken off the towers, were also displayed to visually demonstrate the dilapidation of the “old” world and the beauty of the “new” world.

The Kremlin stars were not always ruby glass. The first stars, installed in October, 1935, were made from high-alloy stainless steel and red copper. In the center of each star, on both sides, the stars were embedded with precious stones outlining the hammer and sickle emblem. Over the course of a year, the glitter of the gems dimmed. The stars were also found to be too big, not fitting well with the architectural ensemble. In May, 1937, it was decided to install new, illuminated glass ruby stars. Also, they added a star to a fifth tower, the Vodovzvodnaya Tower. The ruby glass was produced at a factory in the city of Konstantinov, according to the method of the Moscovite glassmaker, N. I. Kurochkina. It was necessary to prepare 500 square meters of ruby glass, and for that, a new type was invented—selenium ruby glass. Before that, gold was used to color the glass; selenium was cheaper and produced a deeper color.

The Kremlin stars don’t only rotate, they also light up. In order not to overheat and cause damage, about 600 cubic meters of air is blown through the stars per hour. The stars are not affected by power outages, because they have their own, independent generators.

For the original lighting, the Moscow Electrical Lamp Plant produced the lights for the stars. The stars on Spasskaya, Troitskaya, and Nikolskaya Towers all had 5000-watt bulbs, and the other two operated at 3700 watts. In each star, two parallel filaments were installed. That way, if one burned out, the other filament still shone and a control panel is was notified of the burnout.

To change a bulb, one need not need to climb up to the star. Rather, the bulb comes down on a special rod that runs straight through the bearing. The whole process takes 30-35 minutes. In the stars’ history, the stars stopped shining only twice—once during the war, and another time for the filming of the now-classic movie The Barber of Siberia .

Editorial Note: Update 2021. Starting in 2015, the lighting of the Kremlin stars was updated with one star’s lighting system replaced each year. The old incandescent lamps were replaced with modern metal halide lamps. These lamps are approximately four times more energy efficient than the old bulbs and provide a more intense, higher-quality light. Metal halide lamps are often used for sports stadiums and other places where strong, high-quality light is needed.

In preparation for this switch, Employees of the Central Scientific and Restoration Design Workshops (TsNRPM) measured the illumination of each arm of each star separately to make sure that each would still be lit evenly and brightly. They also created models of the stars lit with various methods including LED matrices and optical fiber. In the end, metal halide was determined to be the closest in historical appearance to the existing incandescent lamps.

Within this update, each star was also given its first compressive maintenance since 1946. Damaged panes were replaced, the stars were cleaned inside and out, and the lubricants within the rotation system were replaced with modern fluids.

The State Kremlin Palace

By Benjamin Bradley Mulick

Finished in 1961 after three years of work, the Palace of Congresses, later renamed as the State Kremlin Palace (not to be confused with the Grand Kremlin Palace), opened its doors for the first time for the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, welcoming thousands of party delegates as well as communist leaders from around the world. Today, it is still the Kremlin’s newest building and a multipurpose facility, housing large conventions, cultural displays from around the world and even its own ballet troupe. With these functions giving it continued purpose, the Kremlin’s most modern and out of place building is also one of its most significant.

The Kremlin State Palace stands out from the gilded, pastel buildings around it with its hulking angular lines, and large windows divided by tall marble columns. It’s crowned by a glass banquet hall, which was the brainchild of Khrushchev himself.

It features three main halls: The Great Hall, the Small Hall, and the Diplomatic Hall. The Great Hall is the largest, featuring the palace’s main stage and hosting its most important events. With a seating capacity of six thousand, it is where party congresses were held, and where some of Russia’s most prominent cultural programs take place today. The Small Hall hosts smaller musical performances, and by virtue of having removable seating, also hosts dance events, such as the World Cup of Latin American Dance, as held in June of 2021. The Diplomatic Hall provides a smaller and more intimate setting in which to enjoy performances. Last but not least, the Diplomatic Hall often hosts lesser-known artists, often performing genres that do best in closer settings, such as jazz and folk.

The facility also holds many smaller meeting rooms, intended as breakout rooms for conventions, but also used for various purposes today.

The construction of the State Kremlin Palace came with considerable controversy. Not only is it stylistically wildly inconsistent with the rest of the Kremlin’s buildings, one of Russia’s most oldest and most important historical ensembles, but it also resulted in the destruction of several older buildings to make ways for the Palace’s massive presence.

The demolished buildings included the Old Kremlin Armory Building, originally built in 1851 to house the Kremlin’s ceremonial guard and a collection of state documents and treasure. The northern wing of the Patriarchal Chambers was torn down, formerly part of the private quarters of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Because these were officially designated historic buildings, the legality of razing them was questionable and likely would not have taken place had not the decision been made from the office of Khrushchev himself.

Perhaps the real loss, however, came from underground. The original plans for the palace, before the Second World War, envisioned it as truly massive facility built where Christ the Savior Cathedral now stands. In the Khrushchev era, it was planned to build a smaller but still very large building near MGU, along the river, in what were then the still-developing outskirts of the city. When Khrushchev decided to place it inside the Kremlin, its footprint was again shrunk and it faced restrictions on its height so that the view of the Dormition Cathedral would not be entirely lost.

To make up for this, the bottom part of the building was sunk sixteen meters into the valuable archeological depths of the Kremlin’s soil. The buildings torn down to make room for the Palace were themselves built over much older foundations.

Archeologists were given a short window to explore the former Palace of Natalya Narishkina, the mother of Tsar Peter I, as well the former sites of churches, royal kitchens, workshops, and studios in what was once an economic center based within the historic Kremlin.

Teams of archaeologists were assigned to the area, who, in addition to expected finds, also found a number of secret tunnels. Unfortunately, while the archaeologists did their best to learn and preserve what they could, the limited timeframe allowed by the construction of the State Kremlin Palace meant that the archaeological potential of the site was, in large part, wasted. The tunnels were filled in, the old foundations built over, and the ruins lost to history.

Today, the Palace is perhaps best known as the home of The Kremlin Ballet, which was specifically formed in 1990 under esteemed Russian artist and choreographer Andrey Petrov with the purpose of performing there after the Bolshoi Ballet stopped performing at the palace and returned to the Bolshoi, then under renovations.

While the Kremlin Ballet was created with a strong basis in the classics, they have made more recent contributions to the ballet world with a number of their own classically-inspired modern works, including a ballet adaptation of Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Tom Sawyer .

The State Kremlin Palace also hosts the Moscow Classical Ballet, which has been dancing in Moscow since 1966. Demonstrations of this tradition in the upcoming year will include the Moscow Classical Ballet’s dancing reinvention of Romeo and Juliet (which was considered scandalous when it was first performed in 1972), and a performance of Swan Lake , one of Russia’s most important contributions to dance, as performed by the Kremlin Ballet.

Built to hold important political events, the State Kremlin Palace is more a cultural building than a political one. The stage’s relatively short history promises to be subsumed by its promising future. Whatever the next big musical or cultural phenomenon in Russia is, the State Kremlin Palace will be a part of it.

• Read a review of The Snow Maidan as performed at the State Kremlin Palace on this site.

A Tour of the Moscow Kremlin Today

Tour as reviewed by Helen McHenry, 2019

As part of our SRAS cultural program, we were given the opportunity to take a tour of the Kremlin, a historic complex and symbol of the Russian government. We met our guide outside of Red Square before walking along the Kremlin walls to the visitors’ entrance. She pointed out the swallowtail merlons bordering the wall, a design popular in 15th century Italian-style architecture, before we mounted the battlement. To travel behind the Kremlin walls, we crossed a bridge that used to span the Neglinnaya River but today acts as an archway covering part of the footpath.

Inside the Kremlin is an intriguing mix of old and new – from the 15th century walls to the 20th century block of modernism known as the State Kremlin Palace. Our guide informed us of the controversy over the palace’s design, which stands in such contrast to the more traditional styles surrounding it. The building, built under Khrushchev’s leadership primarily as a government meeting hall, has almost as many floors underground as it does above ground. Although many cried out against the building when it was built, it still stands today, where it is now used mainly to host concerts.

A brief walk along a path lined with cannons from the state artillery collection brought us to what appeared to be the mother of all cannons. Indeed, the Tsar Cannon is the largest bombard by caliber ever manufactured and has never been used due to its vast size. Just around the corner lay a similarly large but unused item – the Tsar Bell. Commissioned during the time of Empress Anna, niece of Peter the Great, an almost life-size image of her adorns the bell’s surface.

We then traveled to Cathedral Square, which, as its name suggests, features a number of beautiful cathedrals. The overcast day did nothing to accentuate the gold domes that capped their many towers, but no amount of gloom could dim their impressive stature – so immense that photographing them from my vantage point proved a challenge. Each cathedral was adorned with more stunning iconography than the last, overwhelming to the point of monotony as we shuffled through the throngs of tourists.

Our next visit was to the State Armoury, a neoclassical building resplendent with the wealth of the tsars. We traipsed through room after room of riches, from icons, dishware, and diplomatic gifts to clothing, carriages, and thrones. What stood out to me the most was the two distinct – and sometimes warring – natures of Russian identity on display at the Armoury, East and West. The contrast was particularly obvious amongst the collections of clothing, weaponry, and thrones. The older pieces hearkened back to the time before the Western pivot of Peter the Great. While these remained just as ornately decorated as their modern counterparts, they were, on the whole, a lot less outlandish than those done in the styles of the West.

The Armoury marked our last stop within the Kremlin, so we traveled across the city center to the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. Although the cathedral is the world’s largest Orthodox church, the current building is not the original. Christ the Saviour was demolished under the reign of Stalin and was only rebuilt in the late 1990s. Since then, the cathedral has gained fame as the site of Pussy Riot’s 2012 performance, which landed three members in jail for “hooliganism.”

Our guide let us explore the church on our own, as the church requires groups to be led by its own guides. Looking forward to lunch, we opted for a quick pass through the cathedral. Had I not been so hungry, I could have spent hours inside, as every surface held intricately-painted religious imagery intermixed with adornments heavily gilded with gold. Photographs were not allowed within the cathedral, reserving this spectacle to be seen first-hand.

The Kremlin in its entirety is a spot I recommend to all visiting Moscow, as four hours within its walls was not enough for our group to even scratch the surface of the wonders within.

Tour as Reviewed by Joseph Ozment, 2016

As part of SRAS’s Russian as a Second Language (RSL) program at Moscow State University, I had the opportunity to attend a guided walking tour of the Kremlin and its museums. We had a professional tour guide provided by SRAS who was very well informed about all aspects of the Kremlin’s sites and always willing to answer questions.

The tour, as offered by SRAS each session, can differ slightly based on availability and timing. We began our day’s tour not at the Kremlin, but at the nearby Cathedral of Christ the Savior, Russia’s largest Orthodox cathedral and one of the largest Christian structures in the world. Note that there are wardrobe requirements for entering the church (men and women both must have their shoulders covered, while men cannot wear shorts and women must wear skirts at least beneath the knee).

Before going inside, we were taken around the massive structure, and given a brief yet informative overview of its history. We learned that, despite the classical style of the building, it is actually only about 20 years old, having been constructed to resemble the church that once stood on the same ground.

During Communist times, the ground on which the Church now stands was a massive swimming pool, having been filled with water after the original Church was destroyed. The plans that the Communists originally had for the site were to construct the headquarters of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which would be one of the tallest structures in the world and house the office of the Soviet Union’s premier inside the head of a giant Vladimir Lenin statue adorning the top.

The Cathedral is a truly stunning structure. Comparable only to St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome in my mind, the sheer amount of open air is amazing when one considers how still and tranquil it is on the inside.

We then continued onwards to the Kremlin itself, which was teeming with guided tours from all over the world, just like ours. Seeing other groups from America, but also some from France, Italy, China, and several other European and Asian countries was very interesting, as people tend not to think of Russia as a popular tourist destination. However, tourism here has grown rapidly in recent years, particularly since the ruble lost about half its value on world markets, making Russia a much more affordable location.

Anna informed us of the purposes of all of the first structures we encountered within the Kremlin walls. First of all, though, she made sure that we were aware that the word “Kremlin” does not refer just the center of government in Moscow, but is a general word that means fortress. Most Russian cities and towns of reasonable size and with a medieval history possess a Kremlin.

We saw one of the offices in which President Putin occasionally works, as well as the large, semi-controversial event and concert hall that resides just inside the main entrance to the Kremlin. Despite its modern style that clashes somewhat with the comparatively ancient structures around it, the fact that the building is covered in glass at least ensures that it reflects the beauty and history that abounds within the Kremlin.

After seeing the aptly named Tsar Cannon and Tsar Bell, both of which are two of the largest objects of their kind in the world, and neither of which have been used for their structural purpose in their existence, we moved on to see several of the many churches that stand within the walls of the Kremlin.

Inside the Church of the Annunciation, we were informed of some of the basic components of any Russian Orthodox Church. For starters, every inch of wall is covered in some image or another, from icons of Saints to giant murals that depict judgment day and the people of earth being sent either to heaven or hell. We also learned that the altar in an Orthodox church is given its own room, to which only the priests are allowed entry. The mysticism that is native to Orthodoxy and inherent to its liturgy was embodied in all aspects of these churches.

After our tour of the Kremlin’s outside squares, we were taken on a tour of the Armory Museum, which houses outfits, household items, carriages, armor, weapons, and various sundry items that belonged to the Tsars and Tsarinas of Russia. Anna knowledgeably led us through the various styles worn by different Russian rulers, and explained the significance(s) behind the appearance of what they wore and the carriages in which they rode.

We were in awe of the beautiful jewels that encrusted everything the royals wore and every vessel out of which they drank or off of which they ate, not to mention of the thrones on which they sat. We saw gifts from foreign dignitaries and rulers, and even the museum’s collection of Faberge creations.

All in all, it was a day rich with history and made even more enjoyable by our friendly and incredibly knowledgeable tour guide, Anna. There is hardly a more essential Russian experience to have during your time in Moscow than a guided tour of the Kremlin.

Incidentally, Anna, a guide that SRAS has worked with for years, helps run a guiding collective in Moscow called Bridge to Moscow . They run many private tours and are available for custom tours and travel as well.

Latest Updates

By Josh Wilson

In addition to the changes to how the Kremlin stars are lit and renovations to the Kremlin bells in Spasskaya Tower , for instance, several recent events are of interest.

In the mid-2000s, the Russian Orthodox Church lobbied for the restoration of the Chudov Monetary and the Ascension Convent within the Kremlin walls. The idea was seriously considered and even discussed on television by President Vladimir Putin, although only in the sense of rebuilding them as cultural monuments and part of the museum complex, rather than as working religious institutions. In the end, however, the Kremlin Presidium was simply torn down in 2016 and the area left mostly open with fragments of the old foundations left under glass for viewing. The result is a Kremlin even more dominated by open space and gardens.

Wind has damaged the Kremlin walls on a few occasions. In June 1998, several of the iconic sparrow tail structures on the wall were damaged by strong winds. In April 2018, strong wind damaged the Senate Palace roof. In October 2021, scaffolding being used to restore a section of the inner wall was blown over the top of the wall, also damaging several of the iconic sparrow tail structures. In all cases, the damage was quickly repaired.

You Might Also Like

The Moscow Kremlin has long been the main symbol of Moscow and Russia – and for good reason. It was with the Kremlin that city of Moscow officially began and from which it grew. The Prince of Moscow, ruling from the Kremlin and drawing on the growing power of his city, united and conquered the […]

Lubyanka: Inside the Story of Moscow’s Infamous Building and District

There is always history surrounding us. In a city like Moscow, this can seem overwhelmingly apparent. Moscow has many imposing buildings from many eras – some are immediately recognizable and others only invite wonder as to what stories lay behind their beauty or grime. Lubyanka is the name commonly used to refer to the building […]

Supermetal: The Latest in Moscow’s Urban Redevelopment

By the end of 2020, the founders of Khlebozavod9 and The Brusov Ship will open a new public space near Baumanskaya metro station in Moscow. A former industrial zone will host the Supermetal Cultural and Business Complex. The team’s plans call for two architectural monuments, laboratories with panoramic windows, three courtyards, and some small manufacturing […]

Warsaw’s Old Town District

While I was on study abroad in Warsaw, Poland, the place I visited most behind the Palace of Culture and Science, where I had classes every day, was Old Town. Why? Simply put, a trip to Old Town in Warsaw is like taking a journey back in time. It is the gem of the city […]

A Day in Tashkent’s Old City: Travel from Bishkek with SRAS

As part of SRAS’s Central Asian Studies program, students had the opportunity to travel to Uzbekistan for a full week. The first day of this week-long expedition began with a half-day tour of Tashkent’s old part of town. We were accompanied by our guide, Donat, or “Don” for short. He had outstanding English, and even […]

About the authors

Serena Keenan

At the time she wrote for this site, Serena Keenan was a rising junior at Smith College in Northampton, MA. She was majoring in Russian, East European, and Eurasian Studies with a minor in Government and a concentration in Translation Studies. She hoped to study abroad in Moscow during the spring 2022 semester. After college, she hoped to go on to work in nuclear nonproliferation. In her free time, she likes to read and crochet.

Program attended: Online Interships

View all posts by: Serena Keenan

Caroline Barrow

Caroline Barrow is a graduate of Texas A&M University with a degree in International Studies and Russian. She loves traveling and hearing people’s stories. Out of the places she’s been able to visit, her favorite was Kiev, Ukraine for its beauty, history, and friendly people. She received a Fulbright English Teaching Assistantship and, at the time she wrote for this site, was spending year teaching English in Kostanay, Kazakhstan. Additionally, she was been named SRAS’s Home and Abroad Translation Scholar for the 2013-2014 cycle. Her contributions included mostly translations of articles and blog posts that will be of interest to students.

Program attended: Home and Abroad Scholar

View all posts by: Caroline Barrow

Lee Sullivan

Lee Sullivan is an undergraduate student at Stetson University. She is currently pursuing a BS in cybersecurity and a BA in Russian, East European, and Eurasian studies. Next semester Lee will be in Vladivostok, Russia – studying the Russian language and participating in the Home and Abroad internship with SRAS. She aspires to pursue a master’s degree upon graduating.

View all posts by: Lee Sullivan

Benjamin Mulick

Ben Mulick, at the time he wrote for this site, was a fourth year Global Studies major at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.

View all posts by: Benjamin Mulick

Jack Fischer

Jack Fischer, at the time he wrote for this site, was majoring in Physics with Russian and Economics minors at Iowa State University of Science and Technology in Ames, Iowa. He is studied Russian as a Second Language with SRAS over the summer of 2016 to improve his command of the Russian language. In the future, he’d like to work for himself and run a business, preferably abroad.

Program attended: Challenge Grants

View all posts by: Jack Fischer

Joseph Ozment

Joseph Ozment is a fourth-year International Studies and Russian Studies major at Rhodes College in Memphis, TN. He is minoring in music minor and has spent a lot of free time on music projects. He is studying Russian as a Second Language and also working an internship with The Moscow Times. He hopes to increase his Russian skills and cultural awareness so as to use his knowledge of the country and language in a professional setting in the future.

View all posts by: Joseph Ozment

Helen McHenry

Helen McHenry, at the time she wrote for this site, was a double major in international relations and Russian at the Ohio State University, with minors in Spanish and public policy. She studied with Russian as a Second Language with SRAS at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow in order to advance her proficiency in Russian and appreciation for Russian culture. She hoped to use the knowledge gained during her time abroad to advocate for foreign policy that strengthens relations between East and West in her future career.

View all posts by: Helen McHenry

Julia Brock

Julie Brock, at the time she wrote for this site, had returned to University of Kentucky to pursue a Global Studies Certificate, with an emphasis on Russia and the travel industry. She earned prior BA and MA degrees in psychology. A few years ago, she traveled to Russia, Estonia, and Finland, and loves the culture and history of these areas. She works at the campus library, and enjoys reading, running 5Ks, and spending time with her dogs. She lived for five years in Minnesota and loved the snow, winter sports, and Museum of Russian Art.

View all posts by: Julia Brock

Hudson Dobbs

Hudson received his BA in Russian Studies with a minor in Corporate Communications from Baylor University. At the time he wrote for this site, he was serving as a Home and Abroad Scholar as part of a Spring, 2022 session of SRAS’s Language and Society program St. Petersburg. While abroad, Hudson will be researching the Russian coffee culture, as well as the evolution of specialty coffee in Russia. His goal is to open his own coffee shop in the US - taking his experiences abroad and applying them to his future business.

View all posts by: Hudson Dobbs